Oaths of Strasbourg - Old French & Old High German

[Theobald]

In 842, Louis the German, son of Louis the Pious, and ruler of the eastern Frankish kingdom, met with his brother, Charles the Bald, ruler of the western Frankish kingdom, at Strasbourg. At this meeting, Louis and Charles pledged their allegiance to each other - and their opposition to the Emperor, their elder brother Lothar.

According to our chief source for the meeting, Nithard's Life of Louis the Pious, each king swore the oath in the vernacular of the other's kingdom.
Historians have long used this passage to illustrate the theory that, by 842, Carolingian society had begun to split into separate proto-countries with different languages and customs.

Philologists are more interested in the texts of the oaths themselves that give us important informations about Old French and Old High German languages; they are one of the first texts we have written in a Romance language clearly distinct from Latin.


Text of the Oaths :

- For the love of God and for the Christian people, and our common salvation, starting today, as God will give me the knowledge and the power, I will defend my brother Charles with my help in everything, as it must be done with one's brother, as long as he will do it for me, and with Lothaire I will never treat with my will against my brother Charles.

Old French : Pro Deo amur et pro christian poblo et nostro commun salvament, d'ist di en avant, in quant Deus savir et podir me dunat, si salvarai eo cist meon fradre Karlo, et in aiudha et in cadhuna cosa, si cum om per dreit son fradra salvar dift, in o quid il mi altresi fazet, et ab Ludher nul plaid numquam prindrai qui meon vol cist meon fradre Karle in damno sit.

Old High German: in godes minna ind in thes christanes folches ind unser bedhero gehaltnissi fon thesemo dage frammordes so fram so mir got geuuizci indi mahd furgibit so haldih thesan minan bruodher soso man mit rehtu sinan bruodher scal in thiu thaz er mig so sama duo indi mit ludheren in nohheiniu thing ne gegango the minan uillon imo ce scadhen uuerdhen.

- If Louis holds this treaty that he gave to his brother Charles, and if Charles my lord doesn't hold, if I can't change his mind, nor me nor anyone I can change his mind will help him against Louis.

Old French : Si Lodhuvigs sagrament que son fradre Karlo jurat conservat, et Karlus meos sendra de suo part non lostanit, si jo returnar non l'int pois, ne jo ne neuls cui eo returnar int pois, in nulla aiudha contra Lodhuuvig nun li iv er.

Old High German : oba karl then eid then er sinemo bruodher ludhuuuige gesuor geleistit indi ludhuuuig min herro then er imo gesuor forbrihchit ob ih inan es iruuenden ne mag noh ih noh thero nohhein then ih es iruuenden mag uuidhar karle imo ce follusti ne uuirdhit.

[Frankiz]

A text written in 842? It's not sucha big deal you know... By the way, it's not in French but in Romance, still close to latin at that time. "Old French" cannot exist as France is a recent post-revolutionary construction made against others nations, cultures and languages not only in Europe but all over the world (don't forget France has territories considered as French everywhere on the planet).

Bevet Breizh dieub!


[Edited and removed the part about the Breton language as per user's request. Mynydd]

[Theobald]

Totally off-topic.

Please someone, delete or move this post since it is only flaming and trolling.

This thread is about old French and old High German philology and linguistics. Brittany's history and language is of zero importance here.

[Menydh]

Originally Posted by Theobald

Totally off-topic.

Actually, there is much sense in what he says that..

Originally Posted by Frankiz

A text written in 842? It's not sucha big deal you know... By the way, it's not in French but in Romance, still close to latin at that time.

In fact by reading the text it differs little to nothing from texts in Late Latin from other parts of Europe. Hardly "Old French".

In fact, it was Latin the language used at the court and to write at the time.

No one in his right mind here would ever say that the early texts in Old Castilian (let alone Late Latin) are "Old Spanish". Even the term "Spanish" to define Modern Castilian is subjective. Many of use, while speaking with other Spaniards, refer to it simply as "Castilian", not "Spanish".

[Theobald]

Originally Posted by Mynydd

Actually, there is much sense in what he says that..

Again your great sense of fairness. We have here a post with one "on-topic remark", then insults against France, an history of the Breton language and finally again insults against France.
So I wonder, what do insults and Breton language have to do with the Oaths of Strasbourg ?

[Menydh]

Insults? Which insults? What he has done is setting the records straight. Take into account that your post gave some misinformation.

On the text about the Breton language, I agree that that should go on a thread apart. I've PM'ed him to do it and edit/delete it from here.

As for fairness, I should remind you now of some posts of yours on another board (now off line, I think). I could have brought them here and set more records straight (some more misinformation there). But I didn't to avoid a confrontation.

[Theobald]

Originally Posted by Mynydd

Insults? Which insults? What he has done is setting the records straight.

let's hope France [...] will disapear for the good of Europe.



Of course this is "setting the records straight". Fortunately France is not going to disappear - if she was you would not be here whining about how the French were nasty-to-the-Occitans-and-the-Bretons-and-the-Basques-and-the-Catalonians-and-the-Corsicans-and-the-Jews-and-the-Algerians-and-the-Senegalese-and-the-Alsatians-and...etc.
As long as there are people willing to fight and struggle for France (and there are a lot) you will not see this.

Originally Posted by Mynydd

As for fairness, I should remind you now of some posts of yours on another board (now off line, I think). I could have brought them here and set more records straight (some more misinformation there). But I didn't to avoid a confrontation.

This board will be back soon and I will show you something then.

Originally Posted by Mynydd

Take into account that your post gave some misinformation.

It didn't. Actually linguists call this language "Old French" - although it should rather be called "Proto-French" perhaps.

Old French
Meaning 1 : the earliest form of the French language; 9th to 15th century
[...]
The earliest documents said to be in French are the Oaths of Strasbourg, which are treaties and charters entered by king Charles the Bald in 842.

Source

By the 9th cent. the language spoken in what is now France was sufficiently different from Latin to be a distinct language. It is called Old French and was current from the 9th to the 13th cent. The earliest extant text in Old French is the Oaths of Strasbourg, dated 842. Of the various dialects of Old French, Francien (the north-central dialect spoken in Paris and the region around it) in time became the standard form of the language because of the increasing political and cultural importance of Paris.

Source

The "Old French" era covers the period from the year 842 (date of the "Serments de Strasbourg", the earliest known document written in the emerging vernacular) until about the year 1400 (the period when the 'two-case' system, which distinguished Old French from its modern, uninflected forms, were disappearing from the written language). The term "Old French" normally refers to the variety that developed in the North of France - called Langue d'Oïl - which existed in numerous dialects and of which the dialect of Île-de-France and the area around Paris (later referred to as Francien) became the ancestor of modern Standard French.

[...]

Linguistically, the development of Old French from Vulgar Latin is distinguished by complex phonetic transformations and a simplification of the Latin case system. By the time of the Serments de Strasbourg (842 A.D., see Earliest French Texts Page) there were just two cases in French, a subject case (cas sujet) and an oblique case (cas régime)

Source

Old French was in use from around the ninth century until the late fifteenth century

Source

But of course - I guess that the Mynydd-Frankiz Ibero-Breton Axis knows more about (old) French language than linguists and encyclopedias do.

[Frankiz]

Originally Posted by Theobald

let's hope France [...] will disapear for the good of Europe.



Of course this is "setting the records straight". Fortunately France is not going to disappear - if she was you would not be here whining about how the French were nasty-to-the-Occitans-and-the-Bretons-and-the-Basques-and-the-Catalonians-and-the-Corsicans-and-the-Jews-and-the-Algerians-and-the-Senegalese-and-the-Alsatians-and...etc.
As long as there are people willing to fight and struggle for France (and there are a lot) you will not see this.

Sorry for the little digression about the Breton language, I just wanted to make a comparison between Breton and French to make every one realize, and especially you, that French is everything except an old language compared to most European languages such as Breton, the one I know best...
I'd like to remove the historical part of Breton but I don't know how to do that, perhaps can you give me some advice on that?

Concerning the insults I would have said to you, well I don't really understand. I just think France will disapear, you think France has a great future as an Empire, our opinions are just opposite on that topic. And yes I think France is fondamentally philosophically a left-wing idea and construction, destroying cultures and languages. Neverthemess I respect your opinion, I just don't agree with you, so please do the same to me. And be aware that I won't hesitate to correct you when the information you give us is wrong, such as the one about the Oath of Strasburg.
Have a nice day all of you.

[Theobald]

Originally Posted by Frankiz

French is everything except an old language compared to most European languages

I've proved the opposite, read above.

Originally Posted by Frankiz

Concerning the insults I would have said to you, well I don't really understand.

Not to me, but to my Nation (which also happens to be yours since you are half French, aren't you ? Or perhaps I'm wrong and I mistake you for another Breton separatist...)

Originally Posted by Frankiz

I just think France will disapear, you think France has a great future as an Empire

I don't. I just want to preserve my Nation and its identity and unity. And - to be sincere - I think that Brittany is more likely to disappear than France, it is already dying anyway (notice that I don't say it is a good thing, it is just a realistic comment). Only 300,000 Bretons speak their language and 64% of them are 60 years old or more, right ?
I'm still curious as to what are your reasons to believe that France is about to die. I mean - if you think so then you should think that whole Europe is going to disappear, because France has one of the most important (and growing) nationalist movements in Europe; and separatist movements in France are tiny (the only serious one being in Corsica) - unlike in United Kingdom, Spain or "Belgium".

Originally Posted by Frankiz

Neverthemess I respect your opinion, I just don't agree with you, so please do the same to me.

You are welcome.

Originally Posted by Frankiz

And be aware that I won't hesitate to correct you when the information you give us is wrong, such as the one about the Oath of Strasburg.

Again : read above. Nothing is wrong in my thread.

[Menydh]

Originally Posted by Theobald

let's hope France [...] will disapear for the good of Europe.

Not an ill-will against a people, but a wish for a state which is oppressing other nationalities to fade away.

But I can see how it sounds different to you.

Of course this is "setting the records straight". Fortunately France is not going to disappear - if she was you would not be here whining about how the French were nasty-to-the-Occitans-and-the-Bretons-and-the-Basques-
-and-the-Catalonians-and-the-Corsicans-and-the-Jews

Actually, judging by the numbers of Jews in France, it's been anything but nasty to them.

I've proved the opposite, read above.

That's nonesense. I can understand Old Catalan and Old Castilian without any idea of Latin, because they already look like the modern languages save a number of details. Even a blind would see that those texts there are Late Latin. Claiming that it is Old French is bizarre.

If those texts are Old French, so the chronicles written in Spain in the 8th century are... Old Asturian?

[Theobald]

Originally Posted by Mynydd

Not an ill-will against a people, but a wish for a state which is oppressing other nationalities to fade away.

The same argumentation was used by the "National-Rethard" against both France and Spain.

Originally Posted by Mynydd

Actually, judging by the numbers of Jews in France, it's been anything but nasty to them.

Hardly. You know that when American neo-cons and Israelis denounce European antisemitism they always name France first, don't you ?

Now :

Israel’s deputy foreign minister, Michael Melchior, chairman of Meimad, a moderate religious party, described France in January as "the West’s worst country for antisemitism". Soon after, Ariel Sharon said French Jewry was "facing a dangerous wave of antisemitism" and announced preparations to welcome French Jews as immigrants. In April, Eli Yishai, minister of the interior and leader of the ultra-orthodox Shas party, offered them $9,000 each to emigrate.

Earlier :

As soon as it had been established, Pétain's government took measures against his real or supposed opponents, like "Francs Maçons." It also created racist laws of Hitlerian inspiration against Jews even more quickly than Hitler did after his ascent to power in Germany. These racist laws were more severe than the 1938 Italian Fascist ones, and they were made even stricter in July 1941.

Earlier :

In the last decade of the nineteenth century the reactionaries and nationalists had recourse to anti-Semitism, by means of which they maintained a persistent agitation for over ten years. The Jews were charged with the ruin of the country and with all the crimes which the fertile imagination of a Drumont or a Viau could invent; and as the accused often disdained to answer such slanderous attacks, the charges were believed by a great number of people to be true. A campaign was started against Jewish army officers, which culminated in the celebrated Dreyfus Affair.
[...]
The virulence of the passions aroused by the case (Dreyfus) was due to strong anti-Semitism in France.

Earlier :

In 1030 the expulsion of the Jews was everywhere decreed in the Kingdom of France
[...]
According to a Hebrew document, the Jews throughout France were at that time in great fear, and wrote to their brothers in the Rhine countries making known to them their terror (1096)
[...]
In the following April, 1182, Philip Augustus published an edict of expulsion, but according the Jews a delay of three months. In July they were compelled to leave the royal domains of France; their synagogues were converted into churches.
[...]
Before St.Louis' departure for the Crusade in 1249 his increasingly stringent piety suggested to him the expulsion of the Jews from the royal domains and the confiscation of a part of their possessions. At the request of Paul Christian (Pablo Christiani), he also compelled the Jews, under penalty of a fine, to wear at all times the "rouelle" or badge.
[...]
Toward the middle of 1306 the king Philip the Fair condemned the Jews to banishment, and took forcible possession of their property, real and personal.
[...]
The Inquisition, which had been instituted in order to suppress the heresy of the Albigenses, finally occupied itself with the Jews of southern France also.
[...]
On Sept. 17, 1394, Charles VI. suddenly published an ordinance in which he declared, in substance, that for a long time he had been taking note of the many complaints provoked by the excesses and misdemeanors which the Jews committed against Christians; and that the prosecutors, having made several investigations, had discovered many violations by the Jews of the agreement they had made with him. Therefore he decreed as an irrevocable law and statute that thenceforth no Jew should dwell in his domains.
[...]
In the beginning of the seventeenth century Jews began again to penetrate into France. This necessitated a new edict (April 23, 1615), in which Louis XIII. forbade Christians, under the penalty of death and confiscation, to shelter Jews or to converse with them. The Regency was no less severe. In 1683 Louis XIV. expelled the Jews from the newly acquired colony of Martinique.
[...]
Napoleon was himself not very favorably inclined toward the Jews.
[...]
The Infamous Decree was an order issued by Napoleon in 1808. The decree suspended debts owed to Alsatian Jews for ten years and diminished their residence rights to restricted areas only.

The current number of Jews in France is mostly due to the fact that Algerian Nationalists decided to deport Algerian Jews to France in 1962 (about 350,000 Jews).

Originally Posted by Mynydd

That's nonesense. I can understand Old Catalan and Old Castilian without any idea of Latin, because they already look like the modern languages save a number of details. Even a blind would see that those texts there are Late Latin. Claiming that it is Old French is bizarre.

I don't think that French and Spanish situations could be compared - on this I guess we agree.
Bizarre ? Perhaps, but I did not invent it.
Also notice :

By the 9th cent. the language spoken in what is now France was sufficiently different from Latin to be a distinct language.

I will try to find more sources on this evolution.

[Menydh]

Originally Posted by Theobald

The same argumentation was used by the "National-Rethard" against both France and Spain.

From a retarded point of view, but there is some reasoning behind it (even if they don't know it):

Ever since the French Philippe d'Anjou was proclaimed as king of Spain, against the will of many of the Spanish peoples and territories, Spain has been forced into a French-like statism which has acted as opressor of the Hispanic identity as a whole.

Not that the French Borbons were the first, as Emperor Carlos removed the Fueros to Castilla earlier than that. But nothing to the extent of what has been done by the descendants of Louis XIV of France.

Hardly. You know that when American neo-cons and Israelis denounce European antisemitism they always name France first, don't you?

LOL.. we got rid of them, so we can hardly be accused of persecuting them in modern times. If there is anti-semitism in France (as there is in America), it is because you have accepted one too many.

The current number of Jews in France is mostly due to the fact that Algerian Nationalists decided to deport Algerian Jews to France in 1962 (about 350,000 Jews).

Wow. I didn't know that Algerians could have such a power of decision on who gets into France. But at this point few things surprise me anymore.

I don't think that French and Spanish situations could be compared - on this I guess we agree.

Latin is Latin, no matter where it was spoken.

Bizarre ? Perhaps, but I did not invent it.

It's called ultra-chauvinism. You can find that among Americans too.

Also notice :
By the 9th cent. the language spoken in what is now France was sufficiently different from Latin to be a distinct language.

Yes, Late Latin or Early Romance. Not French. Also, it was used by a cultured minority (mostly monks and a few noblemen), the people speaking other forms of Romanced language.