|
|
Post by jdl on Jan 16, 2019 0:04:00 GMT
One is a histo-gyographical description based on geography and history of colonisation 1,500 years ago, the other is a recognition of administrative boundary changes when Greater London was created. Quite different. Things change over time. For example Mercia no longer exists, so it's not unreasonable to accept that the modern definition of other regions should change. Modern usage recognises the area from the North of the Thames Estuary as far north as The Wash as being East Anglia and after 1500 years, considering how populations spread and shift, who the original colonisers were hardly matters any more. I'm not aware of anyone (except your good self) who thinks Essex is part of East Anglia. Wikipedia: "Definitions of what constitutes East Anglia vary. The Anglo-Saxon Kingdom of East Anglia, established in the 6th century, originally consisted of the modern counties of Norfolk and Suffolk and expanded west into at least part of Cambridgeshire. The modern NUTS 2 statistical unit of East Anglia comprises Norfolk, Suffolk and Cambridgeshire (including the City of Peterborough unitary authority).[2] Those three counties have formed the Roman Catholic Diocese of East Anglia since 1976, and were the subject of a possible government devolution package in 2016.[3][4] Essex has sometimes been included in definitions of East Anglia, including by the London Society of East Anglians.[note 1] However, the Kingdom of Essex to the south, was a separate element of the Heptarchy of Anglo-Saxon England and did not identify as Angles but Saxons. The county of Essex by itself forms a NUTS 2 statistical unit in the East of England region." |
|
|
|
Post by sword65 on Jan 16, 2019 3:33:15 GMT
Things change over time. For example Mercia no longer exists, so it's not unreasonable to accept that the modern definition of other regions should change. Modern usage recognises the area from the North of the Thames Estuary as far north as The Wash as being East Anglia and after 1500 years, considering how populations spread and shift, who the original colonisers were hardly matters any more. I'm not aware of anyone (except your good self) who thinks Essex is part of East Anglia. Wikipedia: "Definitions of what constitutes East Anglia vary. The Anglo-Saxon Kingdom of East Anglia, established in the 6th century, originally consisted of the modern counties of Norfolk and Suffolk and expanded west into at least part of Cambridgeshire. The modern NUTS 2 statistical unit of East Anglia comprises Norfolk, Suffolk and Cambridgeshire (including the City of Peterborough unitary authority).[2] Those three counties have formed the Roman Catholic Diocese of East Anglia since 1976, and were the subject of a possible government devolution package in 2016.[3][4] Essex has sometimes been included in definitions of East Anglia, including by the London Society of East Anglians.[note 1] However, the Kingdom of Essex to the south, was a separate element of the Heptarchy of Anglo-Saxon England and did not identify as Angles but Saxons. The county of Essex by itself forms a NUTS 2 statistical unit in the East of England region." And it's still a shit-hole. |
|
|
|
Post by daveu on Jan 16, 2019 13:44:11 GMT
Things change over time. For example Mercia no longer exists, so it's not unreasonable to accept that the modern definition of other regions should change. Modern usage recognises the area from the North of the Thames Estuary as far north as The Wash as being East Anglia and after 1500 years, considering how populations spread and shift, who the original colonisers were hardly matters any more. I'm not aware of anyone (except your good self) who thinks Essex is part of East Anglia. Wikipedia: "Definitions of what constitutes East Anglia vary. The Anglo-Saxon Kingdom of East Anglia, established in the 6th century, originally consisted of the modern counties of Norfolk and Suffolk and expanded west into at least part of Cambridgeshire. The modern NUTS 2 statistical unit of East Anglia comprises Norfolk, Suffolk and Cambridgeshire (including the City of Peterborough unitary authority).[2] Those three counties have formed the Roman Catholic Diocese of East Anglia since 1976, and were the subject of a possible government devolution package in 2016.[3][4] Essex has sometimes been included in definitions of East Anglia, including by the London Society of East Anglians.[note 1] However, the Kingdom of Essex to the south, was a separate element of the Heptarchy of Anglo-Saxon England and did not identify as Angles but Saxons. The county of Essex by itself forms a NUTS 2 statistical unit in the East of England region." I've highlighted the bit that contradicts your response. If you want to quote something to support an assertion, you should first check that it does so fully. |
|
|
|
Post by jdl on Jan 16, 2019 21:37:53 GMT
I'm not aware of anyone (except your good self) who thinks Essex is part of East Anglia. Wikipedia: "Definitions of what constitutes East Anglia vary. The Anglo-Saxon Kingdom of East Anglia, established in the 6th century, originally consisted of the modern counties of Norfolk and Suffolk and expanded west into at least part of Cambridgeshire. The modern NUTS 2 statistical unit of East Anglia comprises Norfolk, Suffolk and Cambridgeshire (including the City of Peterborough unitary authority).[2] Those three counties have formed the Roman Catholic Diocese of East Anglia since 1976, and were the subject of a possible government devolution package in 2016.[3][4] Essex has sometimes been included in definitions of East Anglia, including by the London Society of East Anglians.[note 1] However, the Kingdom of Essex to the south, was a separate element of the Heptarchy of Anglo-Saxon England and did not identify as Angles but Saxons. The county of Essex by itself forms a NUTS 2 statistical unit in the East of England region." I've highlighted the bit that contradicts your response. If you want to quote something to support an assertion, you should first check that it does so fully. Like you, I quoted partially to support my point. But whereas my quotes were extensive and form the main part of the article (and my justification), your quote is a brief comment of no real value. Other than a reference to the LSoEA, there is no support for this statement, no other references given, no indication of how often this has been said, or its validity, it's just a statement of the obvious - in almost any discussion, someone will have said the opposite at some time. On its own, that carries no weight at all. Whereas the statement that Essex is officially regarded as not being part of East Anglia, is, quite simply, a fact. I’ve come over all nws! Incidentally, a search for the London Society of East Anglians reveals almost nothing - in fact one of the few references you can find reads "apart from erecting the Liverpool Street Station memorial and commissioning the design of this flag in 1903 or 1905 we can't discover what this society has done, or what it's for". It appears to have been a short-lived 19th century political society, which (apparently) aimed to establish recognition of East Anglia as a separate 'nation' (much as Cornwall is regarded by some). I'm surprised it's even mentioned in the Wikipedia article - I can only assume the author did the same search I've just done! |
|
|
|
Post by gromley on Jan 16, 2019 21:56:30 GMT
I mentally transposed two words in a particular sentence in the last post. The mental imagery was so horrifying I am now in need of counselling.
|
|
|
|
Post by jdl on Jan 16, 2019 22:26:00 GMT
I mentally transposed two words in a particular sentence in the last post. The mental imagery was so horrifying I am now in need of counselling. Oh God, I truly wish you hadn't pointed that out! |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 17, 2019 4:25:56 GMT
I thought East Anglia has firm boundaries, as I assumed that the people born there kept themselves to themselves, particularly in Swaffham.
|
|
