Wings Over Scotland

The hot-headed man in the temple is like a tree grown indoors; only for a moment does it put forth roots. It reaches its end in the carpentry shop, it is floated away far from its place, or fire is its funeral pyre.

The truly temperate man sets himself apart, he is like a tree grown in a sunlit field, but it flourishes, it doubles its yield, it stands before its owner; its fruit is something sweet, its shade is pleasant, and it reaches its end as a statue.

For a storm come forth like fire in hay is the hot-headed man in his appointed time.

May you be restrained before him; leave him to himself, and God will know how to answer him.

Michael Laing at 6:24 pm:

“Keep going, chief! Few things do more to boost the cause of Scottish independence than insulting, fact-free comments like yours.

Every word of your imbecilic comment is absolute nonsense. If you think English is somehow superior to Scots, it’s because you hold the insultingly arrogant belief that England is superior to Scotland. Well, you’re not going to convince many Scots of the benefits of the UK with that attitude, are you?”

I don’t thing English is superior to “Scots”, I think “Scot’s” doesn’t exist despite all the silly phonetic spelling of English words which try to make it different. Spoken dialects are fair enough, but it’s not a “Scots language” anymore than Gerald’s rural Oxfordshire accent on Clarkson’s Farm.

Replying to Republicofscotland at 7:06 pm.

You mean Great Britain’s Labour Party, which once relied heavily on Scottish votes to put it in the UK government. So they’re pitching for votes, you say? Well I never! What to do? Don’t vote Labour, perhaps? No one is forcing you.

Bruntisland,

William John Watson book, ( The Celtic place names of Scotland) may be of some help.

If it is surmised that Burntisland is a copied but miss spelt error then the name may mean a place where there is a hill or ridge, a piece of land compared with the rest,

I have never been to that particular bit of Scotland, if any one knows of the area, perhaps you would be kind enough to give a discription,

The same book by the way suggests where Merlin was actually buried at the bottom of a thorn tree, a little below the church yard at powsail,

When Tweed and Pausayl meet at Merlins grave,
Scotland and England shall one Monarch have,

It was believed to be fulfilled by a strange and den rising of the waters on the day that James VI ascended the English throne.

sam says at 7:22 pm:
“Over the next few centuries, Scots, which was the language of the southern Scottish people, began to creep north while Scottish Gaelic, the language of the north, retreated. By about 1500, Scots was the lingua franca of Scotland. The king spoke Scots. Records were kept in Scots. Some other languages remained, but Scots was by far the most important.”

And it was Pidgin. Unlike the Welsh, the Scots haven’t resurrected their own true language, Gaelic. Maybe it’s just too difficult, eh? Better to pretend that Pidgin English is it, and with pride, while simultaneously whining about “colonisation”. Irony overload.

Scotsmen were at the forefront of building the British Empire and in exploiting slaves. They made very successful slave owners and slave masters for several reasons. They were intelligent, well educated, hard-working, and didn’t have much in the way of opportunities in their original home country.

Some here may be unaware that the last British owned slave to die in Britain died and is buried in Scotland. More surprising than that is just how recently she died. Little more than a hundred years ago.

She was born into slavery in Surinam. Her new owner was a Scotsman by the name of Kirke who owned two huge plantations and a number of slaves numbering between three and four hundred during his period of ownership. He helped develop a Dutch colony, not a British one, but he is an exemplar of the Scottish slave-owning entrepreneur.

She was in domestic service and was, by all accounts, a much loved nanny to the children and a brilliant housekeeper and seamstress.

Kirke retired a hugely wealthy man, in modern day money the equivalent of a billionaire. He returned to Scotland where he bought a very large chunk of land to the North East of Burntisland (which still hadn’t been burnt) and built a monstrous Victorian pile.

He wanted to bring his esteemed domestic slave to Scotland with him, but Dutch law forbad any slave in Surinam from leaving the country. Kirke went through an elaborate and lengthy and expensive legal process to have her slave status annulled and to have her documented as a free woman. The only time it had ever been done.

She lived in a separate house from Kirke’s palatial superhome, but quite close by. Her house is now the garage of a still existing detached house less than a city block from the site of the now demolished superhome.

The surprising thing, to me, is that she died in 1917. She is the last person to have been a British owned slave and to have died in Britain.

Less surprising is that Kirke was hounded by the Revenue for taxes earned in Surinam. He was a stubborn bugger and the litigation lasted almost all of the rest of his long life. The combination of his voracious lawyers and those of the Revenue plus the taxes which the Revenue eventually extracted from him wiped out almost the entirety of his huge fortune.

Just a small little snippet of mostly forgotten history, but an illustration of Scottish involvement in the slavery business in the not so distant past.

What Scots really is is a fascinating centuries-old Germanic language that happens to be one of the most widely spoken minority native languages, by national percentage of speakers, in the world. You may not have heard of it, but the story of Scots is a story of linguistic imperialism done most effectively, a method of stamping out a country’s independence, and also, unexpectedly, an optimistic story of survival. Scots has faced every pressure a language can face, and yet it’s not only still here—it’s growing.

James Che at 8:04 pm said,
“They all breach the treaty,”

If that’s true then it’s clear cut, yet no one wanting independence is using it. Ask yourself why.

Oh, the Bank of Che nonsense again. Anyway, I think you meant,

Th’ bank o sassenach land wisnae wrote intae th’ political agreement o’ th’ treaty o’ union articles as th’ corporation bank o’ scootlund, ‘n’ it remained th’ bank o sassenach land ‘n’ wales. A private corporation,

link to scotranslate.com

This could be fun.

Chas says:
4 August, 2023 at 6:52 pm
It is always amusing seeing the members of the BPHB trying and failing in their pathetic attempts to show how much more ‘Scottishy’ they are compared to everybody else..

———–

I bet ur a rite fecking hoot doon the boozer.

@Sam

“Scots has faced every pressure a language can face”

Naw. It has not.

You really do need to educate yourself about what real cultural oppression looks like.

Alert readers compare you greetin into your dram over having to post here in English with the plight of, for example, the Uighurs in China and shake their heads in disbelief and sorrow.

Republicofscotland @ 6:16 pm

“Freeports in Scotland exposed for the lie that they are”

Aye RoS, anither unwantit Englis Tory ideology imposed on Scots agin oor will, wi the intent tae plunner Scotlan e’en mair.

@Alf Baird

Any evidence that Freeport’s are being imposed “agin oor will”?

I get it that you are opposed, RoS too, although having RoS onside can’t be much comfort for you.

But nobody has asked me, or the rest of us 5.5 million Sovereign Scots what we think. Maybes 6 million.

Is it the case that oor wee pretendy parliament is opposed? Who cares about that shower of numptys and crims, with their fraud of a FM posturing at their head.

As a Sovereign Scot, I am generally open to the idea that Freeports will reduce the cost to me of imported goods. Whilst not in the export business myself, I can well imagine that Sovereign Scots exporters will be keen to avail themselves of low cost, low complexity export opportunities.

So why would any Sovereign Scot be agin that?

The whole “freeport” con appears to be a furtheration
(is that a word?) of the SE of England’s attempt to control the idea of “Capital Expoitation”.

We, the Scots. should control our assets, not capitalists at Canary Wharf.

John Main @ 10:03 pm

“Any evidence that Freeport’s are being imposed “agin oor will”?”

Freeports are an English Tory policy so I guess if you are a Tory voter then you are ok with it, although 80% of people in Scotland did not vote for it. A bit like brexit then, or any Tory ideology which is imposed on Scots against their will.

Changed your view on Scotland’s colonial reality yet? I note Kenny MacAskill has:

link to grousebeater.wordpress.com

The Dalrymple Family, Viscounts an’ awe were part of the Parcel O’Rogues in a Nation. They were an avaricious family and today still possess gains from over 400 years ago.

Bought and paid for in English gelt, Yoonist Scot Butts fer sure !

Guess who owns the Bass Rock ?

Guess when the got it ?

Guess who gave it to them ?

Guess how much they paid for it ?

Ian Brotherhood 11.13pm
“It’s great to see Wings hosting such a vibrant debate about the cultural case for independence”.

It is, Ian. The cultural case is vital, as is education. Just found this link while looking through the website about MacDiarmid’s cottage:

Lesson plans for secondary school pupils;
link to scottishpoetrylibrary.org.uk

link to macdiarmidsbrownsbank.org.uk

Scottish Nationalism is Cultural or it is Nothing.
That is why the SNP has served up to the hungry the cauld kale of zilch.
The founders of national independence movements understood the dynamic of «culture» in their struggles. Economics etc just does not cut to the core of the matter.
Scotland does not need a «case» for restoring what is a basic right, popular sovereignty for the citizens of its historic lands.

TURBADIN – “popular sovereignty for the citizens of its historic lands” – I have no problem with Nationalists and those that contribute on here especially. I respect your position. However, you need to do a hell of a lot better than this, because this argument will get you nowhere. Sure, it can be tagged on to the back of the main argument and no Scotsman or woman will ignore it, but you need to offer up a risk free better future for all of us. Otherwise, no-one’s interested. Take a look at Holyrood – has it been a success and do you want to be governed by Holyrood? That has more relevance to more Scots than “historic lands” has.

TURABDIN is right – it shouldn’t need a ‘case’. A greater awareness of our culture and what’s being lost are necessary though and there are umpteen ways to raise that awareness.

Waste of time hoping for ‘risk free’ mind ye. Life’s not like that. Anywhere.

” …. but you need to offer up a risk free better future for all of us. ”

Risk free ! How they hell can anyone , ever , credibly offer that ?
That´s akin to some TV Evangelist offering a place amongst the * saved * for those gullible/desperate enough to believe it .

Life= Risk . Without it nothing would be done and – as we´ve seen , repeatedly – the equating of risk with threat is the tried and tested strategy of those for whom the status quo is the desired condition .

Horsebox Mike Russell comments.

“Let’s start with splits. It has been clear for a while that there is a strain of nationalism that is passionately anti-Green.”

Yes there is Mike, but there’s also a strain of SNP “Nationalism” that is vehemently anti-independence and anti-Alba.

The current SNP appears in most part to have both.

link to 12ft.io

@Alf Baird 11:13

That’s poor “logic” from you – soz.

Sure, freeports are a Tory idea. But it does not logically follow that because few Scots vote Tory, most Scots are axiomatically opposed to all Tory policies.

I asked you for evidence that freeports are being imposed “agin oor will”. Your best reply is that freeports are being set up without our explicit support.

Not the same thing at all, and you know that.

Any idea what Starmer’s take on freeports is? He will be calling the shots soon. I wonder if freeports will be another idea that “nobody wants” that will persist indefinitely through future government after future government.

I struggle to think of any proper “culture” in my native land, cave dwellers turned warring bands controlled by robber barons.
Religion and the colonial era brought some sort of faux respect and resulted in better living conditions, but in later times we seem to rely on our warlike nature and our love of death and glory against “Johnny foreigner”
As western society continues to decline we have fallen back on that old stand bye sectarianism and our Flodden’s and Culloden’s are now conducted on the sports field by woke warriors representing themselves and multi national interests.

The Captain is spot on, we need to drop the pretence of National greatness at any time in our history, and give the unarmed population something they can really believe in, or even understand will bring them some semblance of prosperity.

TURABDIN – Look at Brexit. It has turned into a right mess hasn’t it? It has made us look small and insular in the world. That experience has left a mark on the psyche of all Scots meaning that when a referendum is put before them again, they will want to be very, very sure that they are voting for something that promises a better life. When things are getting worse, year on year, that is when we look to history and what that may tend to tell us is that Holyrood has been a failure.

akenaton @10:09 am

“I struggle to think of any proper “culture” in my native land… ”

The bardic schools of Gaelic poetry produced work of sophistication. I would say that was proper culture.

“Didn’t we recently vote to stay in our EU comfort zone?”

Main.

What do you mean by we?

I get the distinct impression by your comments over time that you are as Scottish and for independence as much as Chas and ASA are, and we know they are neither of them.

Captain Yossarian @ 8:45 am

“I have no problem with Nationalists”

What about ‘imperial nationalists’, i.e. those who impose their nationalism on other peoples/cultures?

A colonized people only become nationalists in order to reclaim their sovereignty from the imperial nationalists who have stolen it from them. That is why self-determination nationalism is regarded as ‘defensive nationalism’.

On the other hand ‘imperial nationalism’ is by its nature aggressive and violent nationalism. That is why imperialism is described as ‘geographic violence’ and colonialism as ‘force’.

Which brings us back to the root of colonialism, which is fascism; and the fascist is always looking to inflict punishment on those he has procured, especially whenever ‘colonialism is imperiled’.

John Main @ 11:01 am

“show us the money”

Yes, colonialism is primarily about economic plunder and on this aspect you may think you are on the right track. However, plunder within a colonial system is always dependent on colonial racism, where the native culture is debased, and the system (and its institutions) is built upon the cultural gap created between the colonized and the colonizer. This invented cultural gap is what Memmi termed the ‘colonial hoax’. Ignoring the critical cultural aspects of colonial oppression is where your argument falls down.

On Tory Freeports, Scots might expect London Labour to rubber stamp any and all Tory policies as far as Scotland’s ongoing economic plunder is concerned, as both parties do on most matters to do with their core purpose: to protect the ‘integrity’ of the British state, including decisions on war or peace, and of course in pro-actively preventing Scottish independence.

@RoS 11:25

I get the distinct impression by your comments over time that you know as near to SFA as makes no difference.

@fruitella the hun 11:28

Your arguments against naively allowing a narrow group total control of our power generation facilities are sound.

Alas, and it’s bad news for greens, the same arguments apply to public transport. All exhortations for us to ditch our cars and travel by train, for example, founder when alert readers see the rail system endlessly paralysed by strikes.

Incidentally, your statement that a nuclear accident has huge biological consequences is flawed due to its anthropocentric slant. The environs of Chernobyl are now recognised as the most diverse and biologically rich in Europe.

Turns out that all nature needs to thrive is complete absence of humans. An irradiated landscape without people is still better for wildlife than a pristine landscape with humans in it. The issues that bother us civilised humans about radiation, birth defects and cancers, are by and large irrelevant in nature. Animals always produce excess offspring in the expectation some won’t reach maturity. Radiation induced cancers cull animals past the age at which they will already have reproduced.

I’m not saying the best hope for the environment is nuclear war, but plenty of extreme greens are already saying it, so I don’t have to!

The ‘money’ was more than adequately described in the McCrone report.

Is Chris awy on his holidays?

I’ve been looking at examples of how humour can be used in the presentation of rhetorical arguments.

The use of humour in rhetoric can be very effective, but it’s sometimes a dangerous tactic to use when trying to persuade an audience to support an argument.

If humour is used incorrectly, even unintentionally or inadvertently, an argument can be utterly destroyed in favour of an opponent’s argument and, additionally, leave one open to accusations of bigotry, prejudice and racism.

For instance, I came across an interesting online article that said this about a certain kind of ‘humour’:

So, humour – be careful when using it to present an argument, opinion or view; because sometimes…humour is no joke.

Captain Yossarian,

I too worked in Libya in the 1980s.

One of the things that surprised me was that the country was a hell of a lot more democratic than anything we in the UK have.

Their equivalent if MPs, called Delegates, set up a green baise table and a few chairs on a street corner in their constituency and discussed political and economic matters with their constituents in the open. That would never happen in an independent Scotland. That’s for sure.

Yes, political parties were banned, but in North Africa’s heavily tribal society there was a good reason for that. Every Delegate and prospective Delegate had to account for themselves personally and publically.

There was none of this tribal crap of the Scots versus the English or SNP versus Alba. Or the Gaels against the lowland Scots.

They had the highest literacy rate in the whole of Africa and the best NHS on that continent too. Until the economic warfare against the country by you know who, things got better every year, year on year.

The American Empire never forgave the Libyans for turfing the Empire out of Wheelus AFB which as the biggest military base in the whole of Africa, when Britain’s puppet King Idris was overthrown in a popular revolution. To this day, America’s Africa Command is based in Germany, not in Africa at all. That surely stings in the Pentagon and the State Department.

The poodle and heavily politicised Scottish legal system conspired with their American masters to punish and convict (in that order) the Libyan people for the PA103 atrocity which was quite certainly committed by Iran and the PFLP-GC and not Libya at all.

Other than that MSP woman with the scatty hairdo whose name I can’t quite remember right now, no part of the Holyrood mob has done anything at all to contradict the perverse verdict of the Zeist showtrial.

That is certainly not the case in Scotland under the grim aegis of the SNP.

It’s sad that a political party which professes to wish to deviate from London’s line on major things has done absolutely nothing whatsoever to right the wrong that has been done against Libya.

The lickspittle Lord Advocates and Scottish “Justice” Ministers continue to support the lie that it woz Libya wot dunnit.

A bloody disgrace!

@Beauvais 12:57

I was quite unaware of “Scotland’s forced removal from the EU”.

I did notice that the UK left the EU, after a UK-wide vote which asked every UK citizen if the UK should stay in, or should the UK leave.

I am guessing that you suffer from the common delusion on here: you want Scotland to be Independent, and thus you view everything through a prism shaped from your belief that Scotland is already Independent.

But we’re not Independent, we are still very much part of the UK.

Your delusion not only causes a continually warped view of reality, as exampled by the “dragged out of the EU against our will” trope. It leads to a lack of focus and effort on what it will take to get Indy.

That lack of focus and effort started when AS stepped down. It’s not going to restart until Indy supporters begin to accept the reality of Scotland’s political and economic position and plan/build from there.

Ebenezer Scroggie – Libya was a wonderful country and it had everything going for it. It was consumed within a few months by a rabble of delinquents and there is a lesson in that for everyone.

I was building one of 16No new universities which were all under construction at the same time. Mine was in a fabulous place called Sabratha, which is about 40 miles from Tripoli. It was to be for the new generation of Libyan engineers.

It was the best experience of my working life and as you say, in some ways the country was more democratic than Scotland is. The situation there just now is needless and so desperately sad because the population was motivated and all that they needed was honest leadership.

“The first time Yossarian saw the chaplain Scroggie he fell madly in love with him”
-Joseph Heller (with apologies)

James Che @4th Aug 5:34pm

I suspect my Spouses language of the north east may be as old as the hills and plains, that north east Scots first roamed, And is not corrupted slang English

The Scots have been led to believe that their own language is a corruption of ‘standard English’, but that’s a lie. A lie promulgated for reasons we all are now well aware of.

Like any national language anywhere in the world there will be regional variations within a country; regional dialects peculiar to specific areas of that country.

I’m not a linguist and the academic complexities of language structure and development are beyond ma ken. But from what I’ve been reading about the Scots language it’s clear that its origins are ancient and diverse.

I’m reading another book titled ‘Scandinavian Influence on Southern Lowland Scotch (not a fan of this term for Scots but that’s the title), a contribution to the Study of the Linguistic Relations of English and Scandinavian by George Tobias Flom, B.L., A.M. sometime fellow in German, Columbia university.

The Scots have not been taught their own language for many generations and as Alf Baird says, Scots is a rustit language.

I think what Alf means by ‘rustit’ is whereas the languages of healthy, non-colonised nations are dynamic; that they are alive and constantly growing and changing, Scots, although it is still alive, hasn’t developed as it normally would have if it hadn’t been deliberately suppressed.

What I’m beginning to realise is that the language of the Scots and its history and development is a complex area of study.

I have little Gaelic – my mother and grandparents were fluent, tho sadly never passed it to me – but my understanding is that Scandinavian Influence on Scots Gaelic was not insignificant either. Others more knowledgeable of Gaelic might be better placed to advise on this.

However, there seems to be quite a few resources available to those modern Scots linguists actively working to bring Scots back into the mainstream of Scottish life.

The Scottish National Dictionary, the Dictionary of the Older Scottish Tongue, and Jamieson’s Dictionary of Scots to name a few.

Jamieson says:

And this from a more contemporary source:

More info on the Scots language here: Scots Language Centre

John Main @2:24 pm

“I was quite unaware of “Scotland’s forced removal from the EU”” .

What beautiful euphemism would you give it then John?

Labour a distinctly English party is telling it (OIM) Optional Identity Mark in Scotland (Scottish Labour which does not exist its an OIM of London Labour) its MSPs in a foreign country Scotland to say they will reject privatisation in Margaret Ferrier’s ex-constituency, whilst London is saying something different.

This foreign Labour party is trying to fool Scots into voting for it by lying to them.

“SCOTTISH Labour’s by-election candidate in Rutherglen and Hamilton West has been challenged to “reject NHS privatisation” after being pictured alongside shadow health secretary Wes Streeting.

Streeting has repeatedly made clear that, if Labour win the next UK General Election, they would use private companies to tackle NHS waiting lists. “

Sven.

That may well be the case but I’ll add this from the story.

“Hanvey then queries whether there are plans for independent review into the incident and asks that his letter be treated as a Freedom of Information request for the “full disclosure” of the guidelines which led to the perpetrator receiving a warning instead of being referred for prosecution.

Women Won’t Wheesht passed video of the incident onto the police and last month said the footage would be released to the public “in due course” – although this has yet to occur.

The group told The National that the footage had not yet been released because they are requesting that the police reconsider the decision to hand over a Recorded Police Warning.”

We do know that the COPFS played its part, in the prosecution of Craig Murray, the attempted prosecutions of Mark Hirst and David Lewellyn, and then of course their was attempted prosecution of Alex Salmond, not to mention an Mi5 agent within the office (Just the one who knows?)

There is much more I could say about our corrupt judiciary, police and crown office, not to mention our politicians, but I’ll leave that up to this guy, and this guys pretty good as well.

link to petercherbi.blogspot.com

link to gordondangerfield.com

John Main says:
5 August, 2023 at 12:43 pm

“Scotland is hoaching with New Scots voters…They already have their own cultures, and they won’t be interested in giving these up.”

Indeed, that is what we see as the oppressors plan evolves and the colonial corset tightens. Which reflects the far higher significance of culture in this matter over a few dollars more/less, as I and others have pointed out to you.

And as Albert Memmi said, independence “is a matter only for the colonized”. Oor daeless ‘Civic Nationalism’ politicians have clearly still to figure this out; they still think liberation is also about the settler population, the latter holding to other cultures, identities, and values.

Hence Fanon’s reference to the ‘rudimentary understanding’ of national party elites who have ‘never undertaken a reasoned study of colonial society’.

@ John 2.43pm , like you i am confused with scroggies inconsistencies , but there again I am not because I find that most Scots Buts can actually see the glaring hypocrisy they post here and elsewhere but their cowering cringe won’t allow them to acknowledge it , so therefore everything in Scotland is bad and incompetent but engerland is the ultimate imperial master and excels at everything

Him and ArSA are now trying to build a unionist clique within Scotland’s most read and informed independence blog , 1st recruit is yossa the former???? labour voter who is unsure whether he supports independence or not but who thinks the uk govt are less of a threat to Scotland

It wasn’t the people of Dumfriesshire or of Banff & Buchan or Rutland or Cornwall or Shetland, or of any other cluster of shires and counties, who left the EU in a democratic manner.

It was the people of The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland (+Gibraltar) who were members of the EU; and who democratically voted to leave it.

Those who have sense of humour, of any tribe, might like a Youtube video called 17 million fuc*k offs.

Looks like we indigenous Scots are originally from ancient Egypt. Every one of us descendants of the great Pharaohs no less.

According to the ancient Scots Chronicles the origin of the Scottish people, at least in part, derives from the Pharaonic lineage of an Egyptian princess named Scota, who may have lived around 1400 B. C.

There were two Egyptian kings, called by the Greeks Nectanabis (Nexrwaftis) , and as Scota, the fabulous mother of all Scots, appears as daughter of Pharaoh Nectonibus, and the Scots are made to start originally from Egypt.

The old Irish Annals support this same tradition saying that Scota came to Ireland, via Spain, from Egypt.

from Our Ancestors: Scots, Picts and Cymry (1891)
by Robert Craig MacLagan M.D

So, now you know. We Scots are sovereign because we are, each of us, literally sovereigns; every one of us is either a Prince or Princess descended from the great Pharaohs of ancient Egypt.

I quite like the idea of being a Prince of Egypt (now resident in Scotland, of course)

Ancient Egyptian Proverb: “Inquire about everything that you may understand it. Be good tempered and magnanimous, that your disposition may be attractive.”

My tongue is firmly in my cheek with this post – but who knows?

Pharaoh Northcode.

NORTHCODE (3.07) writes: “[…] What I’m beginning to realise is that the language of the Scots and its history and development is a complex area of study. I have little Gaelic – my mother and grandparents were fluent, tho sadly never passed it to me […]”
————————
Though focusing naturally enough on its own remit (ie Beurla Ghallda), the following extract from the DSL (Dictionaries of the Scots Language) website is a helpfully succinct survey of Scottish linguistic history —

SCOTS: AN OUTLINE HISTORY

ORIGINS
The first speakers of the Old English ancestor of Scots arrived in what is now southern Scotland in the sixth century CE. These people were descendants of Germanic invaders who had arrived in the south-east of what is now England from the early fifth century. Their variety of Old English is known as Old Northumbrian, a northern sub-dialect of Old Anglian, the Old English dialect spoken over a wide territory stretching from the English Midlands to the Scottish Lowlands. The area that these first Old English speakers occupied, in what was later to become Scotland, is characterised by place-names with early Old English elements. This area consists of a wide swathe of what is now south-eastern and southern Scotland, with less extensive settlements along the Solway and, perhaps rather later, in Kyle in mid-Ayrshire.

EARLY PREDOMINANCE OF GAELIC
Before the twelfth century the English-speaking part of Scotland was limited to these south-eastern and southern areas (except perhaps for the royal court of King Malcolm III and his queen, Margaret, a princess of the ancient royal house of Wessex, whom he married about 1070). By contrast, there is good chronicle and place-name evidence that by the tenth and eleventh centuries the Gaelic language was socially dominant throughout much of Scotland, including the English-speaking south-east. In origin Gaelic was the native language of the Scots of Alba, the kingdom centred north of the Forth and Clyde, whose kings in the tenth and eleventh centuries also gained dominion of the more southerly parts of what was to become an expanded Scottish kingdom. Until the late eleventh century the increasing linguistic dominance of Scotland by Gaelic continued, but this trend was reversed with the accession of the Normanized kings of Scotland, particularly King David I (1124–53) and his immediate successors. Thereafter place-names and other indications show a spread of the English-speaking area beyond the south-east, first to other parts of southern Scotland, then in the late twelfth and thirteenth centuries to eastern Scotland north of the Forth.

THE SPREAD OF PRE-SCOTS
This expansion of English in Scotland was brought about by several important groups of immigrants who came to Scotland at the invitation of the king: English-speaking servants and retainers of the new Anglo-Norman and Flemish landowners, and of the monks from England and France; and English-speaking ‘pioneer burgesses’, chiefly from south-east Scotland and from northern England, who settled in the new royal and baronial burghs of Scotland that the king and his supporters had founded.

INFLUENCE OF OLD NORSE
Though the language of the royal court and the baronage of Scotland was now Norman French, later to become Anglo-Norman, the native tongue of many of these immigrants of lesser rank was a variety of Northern English heavily influenced in pronunciation, vocabulary and grammar by the Old Norse language brought to northern and midland England by Viking-era invaders and settlers. This Norse-influenced Northern English was the principal, though probably not the only, language of the early Scottish burghs, and its contribution to the formation of the language later known as Scots is probably even greater than that of the original Old Northumbrian spoken in south-eastern and southern Scotland.

EMERGENCE OF SCOTS
Gradually the variety of Northern English spoken in Scotland began to diverge from the Northern English spoken in England, and the Scots language (although it wasn’t yet called Scots) emerged from the thirteenth century onwards: Older Scots, subdivided into Early Scots (up to around 1450) and Middle Scots (from around 1450 to around 1700), and Modern Scots (from around 1700 to the present day). This categorisation may be compared with the usual periods distinguished for English: Old English or Anglo-Saxon (up to around 1100), Middle English (from around 1100 to around 1500), Early Modern English (from around 1500 to around 1700) and Late Modern English (from around 1700 to the present day).

link to dsl.ac.uk

Ebeneezer Scroggie @4:17 am

What motivated the Leave campaign if not tribalism?

So a majority in England can vote to spurn Europe and can override Scotland and according to you that’s not tribalism. But Scotland calling for its majority vote of 62% to be respected is, according to you, tribalism.

Making a cogent case for anything requires far greater consistency of thought and far less hypocrisy than that.

With regard to a return to Scots dialect time, birth rates and demographic change may not be in favour of that happening.

link to archive.fo

“It was the people of The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland (+Gibraltar) who were members of the EU; and who democratically voted to leave it.”

In which the sovereignty of the people of Scotland was cut clean across as described by ex-Welsh FM Carwyn Jones who was more than a bit surprised that the then FM Sturgeon the Judas, didn’t act on it, she promised we (Scots) wouldn’t be dragged out of the EU but when it came to the crunch she folded like a deck chair.

Looking back at the union and Scots Claim of Right, Scotland is a political and economic union, but not a territorial one, one wonders just how many times England has broken the Treaty of Union, the theft of assets and territorial waters and Brexit are the tip of a very large iceberg of broken treaty acts.

This is why the English monarchy cannot publicly swear to uphold the all the aspects of the Claim of Right, for if they did they couldn’t allow their fellow countrymen and women to plunder Scottish assets, this why we have two kingdoms, the Kingdom of Scotland and the kingdom of England along with two sets of crown jewels, yes we had the pretendy coronation in Scotland to try and fool Scots into believing that King Charles III is sovereign over Scots and we also have two crown offices, and two sets of distinctive laws and that’s just some of the major differences between the two kingdoms.

In England the crown (monarchy) is sovereign, in Scotland its the people that are sovereign the two are utterly incompatible.

Beauvais,

It was the majority vote of electorate of the member state of the EU: The United Kingdom of the United Kingdom of Great Britain (+ Gibraltar) who voted to leave to EU which we had never voted to replace the EEC anyway.

It doesn’t matter a toss whether the guid fowk o’ Auchtermuchtie or Fruchie or Unst or Embra’s New Town or South Kensington voted one way or the other.

The democratic vote of the people of the member State of the EU prevailed.

The same can be said of the result of THE IndyRef.

Like it or lump it. Your choice.

Democracy can be a bitch.

EBENEZER SCROGGIE
«Tribalism, nationalism and racism are all exactly the same thing»
There is the opinion of someone who despite his travels has actually learned little. The three are quite distinct and not comparable.
A very dated colonialist assessment of the world through the eyes of a Westerner.
The cultural nationalism of the anglo saxon US and UK, Nato etc is one supposes «OK».
I know «the type» very well as do billions of others.

Due to the ” two” positions of where sovereignty lies in Britain through the “Claim of right” as part of the political treaty of union, the kingdom is and cannot a United kingdom,

There are two Sovereign Realms in Britain
The Sovereign Scots one with all same original territories since before and since 1707,
The separate ( but) still the kingdom of England with its territory as was before and since 1707,

For the political treaty articles did not mention or refer to Scotlands “Claim of right ” becoming invalid after 1707 any more than it referred to the English bill of rights becoming invalid after 1707.

I hold two positions at present on the political treaty of union, either one may be true or one cancels the other out.

If the Scottish parliament was extinguished from the treaty of union in 1707 along with the Sovereign claim of right then there is no united kingdom.

If the political treaty of union does exist and is not a hoax, then the Scottish Sovereignty over the Crown in the Claim of Right in the articles of the treaty of political union does not bestow on Westminster Sovereignty of parliament in Britain as one United Kingdom at all,

Either way there is no ( one ) united kingdom,

changing the laws of Scotland in the reform bill ( Scotland ) Acts while not being united in Sovereignty of Crown in Westminster parliament implies no legal authority in Changing the laws and Court systems of Scotland to include Englands Crown in Scotlands justice system since 1707

In the political treaty of union with Scotlands old parliament and Westminster parliament it is not a legal position for Westminster parliament self imposing it laws of the old English parliaments sovereignty on Scotland unless it is still Claiming to be the parliament and kingdom of England holding that sovereignty,
and within that scope had Colonised Scots, Scotlands territory, its sea, and laws.

@Beauvais 4:51

The truth is that a majority of UK voters voted to leave the EU.

As the sages say, truth is beauty, and beauty, truth. So there’s the beautiful formulation you asked for.

I could repeat the EU referendum question that we were all asked for you, but what’s the point. You are convinced the question had something about Scotland in it, so who am I to disturb your dreams.

Incidentally, alert readers of a logical turn of mind have noticed that some of the regulars on here repetitively claim that the Indy referendum vote for Yes was destroyed by non-Sovereign Scots voting No.

How is it then, that the idea that Scotland’s EU referendum vote for Remain has never been treated as suspect on the suspicion that it was non-Sovereign Scots voting for Remain that overturned a Sovereign Scot majority for Leave?

Has this never occurred to you, or do you simply choose to discount it as awkward to your predetermined narrative?

Stands to reason to me that no pro-Indy Scot could ever have been opposed to Indy for the larger UK, simply because the same justifications apply to both situations.

Northcode,

Thanks for your learne’d reply and the names of good reference material to read in the near future,
Indeed colonisation is not restricted to territory alone, but to the suppression culture and languages,

Did you know that one of the reasons or excuses that Westminster gave for changing some Scots laws after the treaty was as follows,
That many people in the parliament of Westminster could not understand what the Scots laws were saying, because they did not understand SCOTS, so Westminster considered they could be and should be construed as obsolete Laws.

I read this a year or two ago while searching through records of Westminster, I took Notes, so if I can fond them over the next week or two I will post them here on Wings,

But the laws of Scotland predjudcially thrown out because Westminster members could not the understand the language of Scots,.

Another source of old Scots words can often be found in Annuls of a County or district,
I learnt the word ” Dinged” from recorded court cases as meaning a variety of insults physically, but could also be used in a slightly different context depending on the conversation and the understand of the Clerk recording,

This is a quoted from one of those court passage proceedings,

“He creeped up on him, and under the cover and clood o darkness he did ding him on the heed”

Sven,

The Crown office in Scotland is illegal if the treaty of union is to adhered to and not breached,
As the Crown is only Sovereign south of the border,

@johnlm 6:00

Did you think you were deploying the tactical nuke there? The accusation of “wacist” that leaves nowt but a towering mushroom cloud, not one stone standing upon another, and a dead, silent wasteland?

Whoops! All I saw was a pantomime effect where a little flag came out with “Bang” written on it.

Not impressed, soz.

I advise you to up your game.

John Main.
Are you still here.?
How do you see Scotland in 20 years if we are still in the union?
Show me the money.
Twerp.

Northcode @ 4:38 pm

“Looks like we indigenous Scots are originally from ancient Egypt”

Archaeological evidence in Ireland does indicate some connection with Queen Scotia, daughter of a pharaoh, and son Hibernia, whose movements out of Egypt were first to what is now Spain and the Balearics. Ireland was formerly known as Scotia. Such as it was, the story would be brought to Scotland via the movement of Gaels from Antrim into Argyll, the latter referred to as the Dalriada Scots.

However, the Picts, who inhabited most of Scotland, predate the movement of Gaels from Ireland/Scotia into the western fringes of what we know today as Scotland. Later we have the ‘merger’ between ‘indigenous’ Picts and the Gaels to form the Kingdom of Scotland during the 800s.

Has Ernie Walker produced his report on Scottish football yet?

Johnlm,

The money is funnelled in the front door under a Country we are in a proxy war with and oot the back, into the global banks,
Nae track and trace and no receipts gathered.

Show us the money returned or show us the receipts for the loan. Show us the money Britain, wgere is our money,
This is much worse than the Snp skiddadling corrupt with money and Billions of pounds more, and no receipts, no paperwork,
And the police are not investigating one penny.

Turabdin,

«Tribalism, nationalism and racism are all exactly the same thing»

Yes, they are all the same thing on different scales, only a slope from bad to worse.

I, personally, subscribe to none of those evils.

The tribalism of Scotland is self-evident, including here on this forum. I’ve seen worse, having lived amongst Arabs for years and in Nigeria too, but you only have to live in central Scotland to experience the fitbaa’ tribes to experience that same latent tribalism.

The nationalism of Scotland is self-evident, sometimes in vile personally abusive form of ad hominem attacks, eg on this forum. It’s exactly the same shit.

The racism of Scotland is self-evident, including here on this forum where some (a minority, I hope) believe that if a child is born in a country which is inhabited by people of low reflectivity, then their Scottishness is somehow attenuated or invalidated.

I do not agree with Tribalism or with Nationalism or with Racism, for I recognise that they are all shades of a very dark grey part of humanity.

Scroggie claims that he isn’t a racist.
Yet here he is, dripping his poison, trying to stir the pot.

Ebenezer Scroggie

You wish to live in a world where one’s origin, culture and world view is irrelevant. That’s defo admirable in my book.

We don’t live in that world. All of history tells us that. To deny that reality is not admirable at all.

Soz.

It’s Innarestin that you write of people of low reflectivity. If I was to travel to one of the countries where these people live and try to tell them what to do and how to live their lives, I would be given a very short shrift.

And entirely rightly too.

The idea that I, or my son, could aspire to become their “leader” is risible. And again, that’s entirely right.

Soz again.

If you take a proud, free, independent country like Pakistan, for example. The humblest, most poorly educated Pakistani knows that no white Christian could ever be allowed to lead her country. No matter how many generations had been spent in the country. And that’s exactly how it should be.

Soz. You either accept that as a given, or you have to make the ludicrous claim that an entire country, nation and culture are irredeemably racist. And the latter is not a good look at all.

John main
To quote Scroggie tribalism, nationalism and racism are all the same thing.
I think he just accused everyone here as being racist.
Go on. Tell him to “up his game”

I’m an ex surveyor too, and have worked abroad. But I wouldn’t pretend to
lecture on how the world works just because I once had a crap behind a sand dune.
Surveyors understand trigonometry. They are not geniuses.

Viscount Ennui,

What a brilliant and insightful post!

Is there any genetic evidence for the Egyptian connection? The narrative is that Neolithic farmers came from the eastern Mediterranean through Anatolia and eventually into Europe via two routes mainly through southern Europe into Central Europe and also through the Iberian peninsula, eventually arriving in the British Isles. They were the megalith builders with many sites throughout Britain and Ireland notably the religious centres like Ness of Brodgar and Stonehenge. They mainly erected communal tombs like Howth and Dowth, Maes Howe etc.

There had long been a version of history which maintained that changes and culture and religious practice had been due to new people arriving but mid-29th century the narrative changed and archaeololgists came to believe that the native population had remained the same and it was simply the cultural ideas and artefacts had been adopted from elsewhere.

However, recent large-scale genetic surveys undertaken by international teams of geneticists using the latest techniques of testing revealed that the Neolithic peoples had been Mediterranean in origin and were dark-skinned and brown eyed but they were largely replaced by a people whose ancestors came from the Pontic steppe – and that put the proverbial cat amongst the pigeons. This upset some archaeologists who were firmly of the belief that the population of these islands had basically remained the same and had simply adopted new ideas from the near continent.

This new population had lighter skins and were likely to have lighter eyes too, as well as lighter hair – brown or fair. They also tended to be taller than the Neolithic farmers. They brought with them the new technology of metal working and were horsemen. ( It’s speculated that horses were first domesticated in the eastern steppe where related peoples who shared their ancestry lived.) They brought with them ideas of warrior hierarchies and barrow tombs for notable individuals. The genetic Y-chromosome marker of these people is the haplogroup R1b-M629 which most males in Scotland and Ireland have to this day. ( They also introduced two mitrochondrial haplogroups which had never existed in these islands before which shows that they brought their womenfolk with them.)

It always intrigued me that the Declaration of Arbroath had claimed that some of the ancestry of the Scots was from Scythia. Back then I thought that this was the usual historical origin myth which many peoples had but still found it strange that they should have chosen somewhere so distant from Scotland and with no discernible connection to Scotland. However, it makes me wonder a little that they should have picked on a people who, though later than the coming of the steppe-related people to the British Isles, shared some of their steppe ancestry. It was only the advances in genetic science in modern times which actually revealed the actual connection.

It is still puzzling why, though the Y-chromosome R1b is the most prevalent in Europe, that in the British Isles there seems to have been replacement of the former population. Some archaeologists find it hard to accept the Neolithic people who built the great stone circles and tombs should have disappeared. In other parts of Europe there appears to have been an intermingling and the Neolithic farmer genes continued, to return in a later iteration to England – but that’s a whole other story.

Viscount Ennui @ 8:34 pm

“Scotland is pretty crap at governing itself”

We shuirly winna ken that until Scotland does govern itself. Hence the UN terms ‘non self-governing territory’ and ‘administrative Power’.

Xaracen at 8:52 pm.

“So you think that just because one nation is larger than another nation, the smaller nation is legally and democratically obliged to be subservient to it?”

I didn’t say that. Scotland is a region of the United Kingdom (that’ll rile people again) and proportionately represented in the UK Parliament. Devolution gave it some independence which others regions don’t enjoy but it’s still part of a central, cooperative UK Parliament and the arrangement means it has democratic obligations. You might regret that history led us here, or think that somehow Scotland was going to sit in Parliament but then do its own thing, but what would be the point of that?

John Main,

“you have to make the ludicrous claim that an entire country, nation and culture are irredeemably racist.”

No, thankyou.

You only have to visit, or even view, how two cultures of the same “race” can come to agree not to come to blows after the event and can co-operate in a ceremonial fashion.

I’ve been to the Attari Wagah ceremony, from both sides on quite separate occasions, and I’ve seen the fervour of the thing.

It really isn’t a “race” thing. Their’s is not a race thing. It’s a tribalistic and religious thing as much as national.

Rangers v Celtic, with empty guns and good discipline in the crowds.

Quite nice, actually. On both sides.

Much nicer than the very nasty ad hominem attacks that I’ve suffered hereabouts.

You can find umpteen videos on YouTube about that daily ceremony.

es is a belief thing.

JGedd
Regarding the Picts/scythians/goths you maybe interested in a series of films by Ashalogos on big huge
Part 1 – link to bitchute.com
Who knows the truth with scientific credibility in the dumps currently.

@Ebenezer Scroggie 9:52pm
Come on I am somebody that grew up on the East Side of Scotland. “Rangers vs Celtic with empty guns and good discipline in the crowds”. Thank fcuk they don’t have guns. The truth, the rest of Scotland wants Glasgow to settle their difference. Until then Scotland will be a lesser people. I never got Glasgow. But then they never got Ferries or Highland Community nurses leaving for the far side of the World. Or anything in fact than prevented a vote for SNP or Green without consequence.

James Jones said;
“Scotland is a region of the United Kingdom (that’ll rile people again) and proportionately represented in the UK Parliament.”

Bullshit; Scotland is not a region, you ignorant arrogant tit, it is one of the two sovereign kingdoms that created the Union and its Parliament. Scotland’s MP numbers represent the relative size of its population compared with England’s, but their authority as agents of a sovereign founder of the Union is fully equal with the authority of England’s agents, who act for the other sovereign founder.

Both those sovereignties are entitled to demand and to get full recognition of their rights and authorities, but Westminster’s refusal to respect Scotland’s rights and authorities is a clear abuse of its obligations to a full Principal of the Treaty, which that Principal agreed with the only other Principal of the Treaty, the kingdom of England.

The Union is a formal legal partnership of the two kingdoms, it is NOT a formal legal partnership of their 650 constituencies, which is how Westminster actually treats it. That Westminster’s internal voting system has never been amended to recognise and respect that fundamental constitutional truth is unlawful, and an utterly undemocratic and abusive disgrace.

That you appear to be smugly content with that shoddy shameful arrangement is all the rest of us need to know about you, and others who hold a similar view.

Pitiful bollocks from a ludicrous self-catering chancer.

“Sure, freeports are a Tory idea. But it does not logically follow that because few Scots vote Tory, most Scots are axiomatically opposed to all Tory policies.” John Main

PS: Use of ‘axiomatically’ added to give pretence of intellectual thought.

Why let a trial get in the way of a lynching?

link to archive.ph

Yossarian recommends fleeing Scotland only to return for the benefits on retirement.
But there will be no benefits because everyone has left.

It’s a catch-22 situation

johnlm

How did you miss Yousaf’s plan? It was announced only last week, FFS.

Import a million or so New Scots. Arrange their perks, benefits and residence terms so that they will be voting SNP in perpetuity (til they are savvy enough to form their own political representation, actually).

They will be doing the work to ensure us Sovereign Scots get our benefits.

You might think this idea is simply a government implemented Ponzi Scheme but don’t knock it. It has been running successfully in England since Blair.

UK doing great John Main.

link to nationaldebtclock.co.uk

As usual show us the money. Over £5k per second .

It’s kinda magic ain’t it!

John Main.
When I know you have been reading my posts it feels unclean somehow..
Once BRICS is up and running there will be no need for people to flee their homelands.
Oh … wait … you hate BRICS don’t you?

Scots Law, the perfect gift. Been waiting centuries to be unwrapped.

The People are ready to utilise the above against the devolved Scottish Parliament, to seek adequate procedural representation, from elected agents.

Are you ready to participate in such momentous occasion?

John Main @ 8:11 am

“How did you miss Yousaf’s plan? Import a million or so New Scots.”

The ‘population policy’ for Scotland is not Yousaf’s plan, it is Gove’s plan. Oor colonial administrators are merely helping deliver it. Its a simple formula: ‘New Scots’ = No voters (mostly).

On your argument that the union was established for economic reasons, we should not forget the threats and bribery, or the usual imperial subterfuge, much of which lingers still.