More on the question of the Breton and Gallic identity

[Cirrus]

> Second part of my message :

Originally Posted by Mynydd

Your mistake here is that you are thinking in terms of citizenship, not of nationality. By doing so you limit your ability of reach, and therefore your ability to succeed. If speaking of ethnic preservation, one must reach alway for the top and arrive as far as possible. That the results will not be the exactly expected is only of secondary importance.

French nationality and citizenship are the same thing. That's a fact : France is Republic since 200 years. One of the most important principe of this Republic is that it should not be maid any distinction between all citizens regarding their ethnicity or race. This a “sacred” Constitutional principal (which can not be removed : the 'Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen' is a part of our Constitution).

Since then, France is by nature a State who condemn an ethnic definition of the nation, and who recognize only citizens.
It’s not me who confuse citizenship and nationality, it’s the French State !

And this definition of the French State is supported by the vast majority of French people and all the great policial parties (even th FN). What can I do, then ? I speak about reality here, and not what I want it to be.

Originally Posted by Mynydd

I disagree. I believe that defining the French identity in ethnic terms would be most useful for the French. By not doing it that way, you accept the continuation of jacobinism in the multicultural/multirracial world of today. In other words, you issue your own sentence to die out.

Of course it will be more usefull for them, but they don’t care. People from Martinique, of the Reunion, Guadelupians, sons of immigrants born here, they are all French.
In term of citizenship, yes, but also in term of nationality because it is the same thing here ! And a great part of them, in fact, feel French.

Many of them will say that they are proud to be Morrocan, Algerian, West Indian or whatever. But if you object to their French national character, they will say that they are trully French, born here, that France is their country...
In fact, for some of them, it is very true and honest. Some of them will even identify themselves with regional identities : I've known people of African descent saying that they were proud to be Breton ! What should I said, then ?

And the native French population don’t care. The majority consider them to be French : they don’t have any ethnic conscience or whatever, and they all support our 'national' team !
The feeling of unity I talked about, they get it. With those non-European people. So, explain me what can we do in this context ?

There are still French people who care about their kin and the future of their nation. A minority, often nationalist. We must care about them and construct something with them. For the others, why should we care ? They hate us, anyway.

I hope for you, that it’s not the same thing in Spain and that your population is not like our.

Originally Posted by Mynydd

... a Breton ethnic identity? ... or a Gallo-Breton identity?

In fact, Breton nationalism is not really an ethnic one. It’s rather a mix between an historical one (the memory of the former Duchy of Brittany) and an ethnic one (the Breton people).

Gallo people are considered Breton (and they considered themselves to be Bretons). But the ancient (Western) Bretons didn’t consider them to be real Bretons, since they called them (Eastern Bretons) 'Gallos' which mean 'French'.
So, bascially, we can say that there are two ethnicities (Brythonics and “Gallos”) living in the same historical unity, the former Duchy of Brittany (a feeling of unity which is indispensable to form a nation).

But now, the linguistical separation is outdated, and a Breton nationalist will care about the whole Brittany. I don’t know if they will succed, because when the cultural character of a nation is dead, separatism has fewer reason to be, especially when it is a leftist separatism.
But I personnaly believe that independance would be a good thing for Brittany (economically and because I think that we should support every form of indigenous separatism - in the context of Multiethnic France, of course). It’s the problem of the Bretons, if they want it or not.

Anyway, I don’t know if I’m more attached to my French identity than my Breton identity. But I consider those two to be quite different.

[Youenn]

Originally Posted by Mynydd

And which country was not?

So, why do you say “French” for Armoricans ? It's just anachronic.

How are you comparing to 800 hundred years of fighting and dignity of the Irish people? It is truly amazing that you do..

I said that because I have the impression you would like see Breton nationalists fight English instead the total frenchisazion.

Of course the situation are obviously different. England has been violent with Ireland but that makes a strong people - against English, not against African migrants since there are an african mayor - and she never try to englishized nationally Irish people.
The french colonisation has been more insidious, no violences and strong assimilationism since the french revolution.

I would like to dig into that part of history. If I'm not wrong, many Bretons turned down the fight as Henri IV converted to Catholicism, letting down their own people and the Spanish who were there to help their cause. As in the case of the port and city of Saint Malo, which submitted to the obedience of Henri IV of France.

It was the surrender of the Breton government of Morcoeur, supported by Spain, to the French that confirmed the French control of Brittany.

England was and is Protestant, not France. Brittany who was strongly Catholic - more than France in fact - will split very easily from a protestant France. See Flanders and Netherland, they are ethnically united, they split for religious reasons. Today with the lose of christianism, there are more hopes they unite but for ethnical reasons.

Finally, religious things made a strong distinction between people, more than ethnicity or meta-ethnicity. Wales, Isle of Man, Cornwall and Scotland who are more or less protestant had more difficulties to gain a recognition comparing to Ireland.

Today, in Brittany this loss of catholicism clarify many things but it's a bit too late. Materialism, french and non-euro immigration will not help to awake breton people, except a minority.

It was even before that it was identified by othes as Gaul. Even in modern times, in Spain, it is customary to use words like galo, país galo, autoridades galas, etc.. to refer to France and to the things pertaining to France.

We call “Britons”, people of Great Britain, that means Scottish or English are Britons ? No, only partially. I notice, Republicans like British use the same ridiculous cheating to prove their expensionism.

Since and image is said to be worth more than thousand words..

Your map is – purposely - wrong. Borders have moved and today we are all gallos like africans french speakers, the accent are the only thing who is different.
This map explain more the situation between the centuries :



Anyway, Breton ethnic identity for sure, for many reasons :

- People of the east don't care for Gallo dialect or Gallo identity, they prefer want speak Breton. I have some explanations.
The first is that they are from a Bro who has been gallicized before the XIX century.
The second, it's more complex and it's more for bretons of the march, the east of Roazhon/Rennes and Naoned/Nantes, territories which never have spoken Breton. With the time, they have been assimilate to the Breton state but with their Armorican substrat they feel mentally more connections to speak a langage who are more near to their mentallity that a Roman language. I think it's for this reason that you find more Breton-speakers in Naoned/Nantes than in Kemper/Quimper.

- Another reasons are political. I don't know many multi-linguistical states who don't have problems. I'm not against a special statut for the Pays de Retz like the Schleswig-Holstein but for the rest of Brittany, I'm pretty sure - after read “La Bretagne dans 20 ans” of Ronan Le Coadic and after speak with bretons of the east – they will not be against the breton language.

You can see this article and this map who show the interest of Bretons :

Les Bretons face au destin de leur langue

... or a Gallo-Breton identity?
(note: Gallo = a Galo-Romance Langue d'Oïl)

Gallo-Breton identity ? Never heard that.
It's funny because the first people to defend the Gallo dialect are the French imperialists, even if they don't care (but really don't care...) of others dialect like the Normand, the Poitevin or other. In fact, for them this dialect is just useful to destroy our identity.
The second are the breton marxists, because it's a struggle of minorities.

[Cirrus]

Originally Posted by Youenn

Of course the situation are obviously different. England has been violent with Ireland but that makes a strong people - against English, not against African migrants since there are an african mayor - and she never try to englishized nationally Irish people.
The french colonisation has been more insidious, no violences and strong assimilationism since the french revolution.

In fact, Irish people has been anglicized (what language do they speak now ?) and colonized. And English wanted them to be, not English, but British.
We have really nothing to envy them on that point (except that they are now independant).

[Youenn]

Originally Posted by Cirrus

In fact, Irish people has been anglicized (what language do they speak now ?) and colonized. And English wanted them to be, not English, but British.

I've specified "nationally", if I wanted to speak about the language, I will say “linguistically”.
The difference is that British is not a nationality but a kind of citizenship. French actually – since the revolution - confound nationality and citizenship.

We have really nothing to envy them on that point (except that they are now independant).

I don't think so. If Bretons were just considering like citizen of French Kingdom and not French, that will change MANY things.

[Laocoon]

Originally Posted by Youenn

Gallo-Breton identity ? Never heard that.
It's funny because the first people to defend the Gallo dialect are the French imperialists, even if they don't care (but really don't care...) of others dialect like the Normand, the Poitevin or other. In fact, for them this dialect is just useful to destroy our identity.
The second are the breton marxists, because it's a struggle of minorities.

So after several centuries, you think there hasn't been enough time for a Gallo identity to born and make Eastern Bretons care for their traditional language?

Breton toponymy in High Brittany.


SITE MAEZOE

[Youenn]

I reply a bit later. I was absent during the one month after my last reply and I forgot this thread.

Originally Posted by Carnyx

So after several centuries, you think there hasn't been enough time for a Gallo identity to born and make Eastern Bretons care for their traditional language?

Contrary to Breton language, not many people care about Gallo, except a minority. Furthermore often the proponents of Gallo also speak Breton, I've met them before.
I've no luck, there was a map on the site that I posted which showed the attachment of people to Dol, St-Malo or St-Nazaire to the Breton language.

Why this ? The Breton language became after some decades the lingua franca in the Breton movement (cultural and politic). Gallo reminds for people may be the frenchization and contrary to the Scot in Scotland, he never had an importance like it (the Scot).

And after all, I will not blame eastern Breton who try to revive the "celticity" in eastern Brittany with the Breton, their old language before the romanization was near to Briton. It's not like it was a kind of "Celtic imperialism".

[Laocoon]

Perhaps they do not because Gallo is not as fancy as Breton, the Celts, etc. and it is also way too close to French. Anyways, it's not my problem.

An interesting map:

Map of early medieval Brittany c. AD 400 - c. 1200

[Cirrus]

Originally Posted by Carnyx

So after several centuries, you think there hasn't been enough time for a Gallo identity to born and make Eastern Bretons care for their traditional language?

I don't think that there is a Gallo identity stricto sensu, separated from the general notion of Breton identity.
We should better talk about "Upper Brittany" or "Roman Brittany" in this case : after all, "Gallo" only means "French" or "Frenchified/Gallicized" in Breton. Brittany has always been bi-cultural, and it would be sensless IMO, to separate the Celtic and the Roman part of this country.

But the problem is that the Breton nationalist movement always concentrated of the Celtic part of Brittany concerning the cultural side, but they still talked about the whole country in their projects of independence. I think that if they wanted an all-Breton Brittany, they should have concentrate their effort to create a nationalism made specifically for Lower-Brittany (Breiz Izel) i.e the Brythonic Brittany. But in fact, Breton nationalism has never really been an ethnic nationalism, but rather an "historical" one.

Originally Posted by Youenn

Why this ? The Breton language became after some decades the lingua franca in the Breton movement (cultural and politic). Gallo reminds for people may be the frenchization and contrary to the Scot in Scotland, he never had an importance like it (the Scot).

It is the lingua franca of the Breton movement, but in Brittany and even within the Emsav, all the Bretons speak French now. For exemple, even in the forum of a movement like "Adsav", most of the messages are in French.
Another fact is that French was also a language used in Brittany before the French annexion.

Originally Posted by Youenn

And after all, I will not blame eastern Breton who try to revive the "celticity" in eastern Brittany with the Breton, their old language before the romanization was near to Briton. It's not like it was a kind of "Celtic imperialism".

Yes, but like Carnyx said, I'm afraid it is only because Breton is more "fashion" than Gallo.

[Laocoon]

Originally Posted by Cirrus

I don't think that there is a Gallo identity stricto sensu, separated from the general notion of Breton identity.

It's not my opinion, I don't consider them foreign to the Breton identity, on the contrary, I think they are as Bretons as Western ones.
In regard to Gallos and what you said, what I mean is that you don't have to speak Breton to be and feel Breton if you accept the Romance influence in Upper Brittany.
On the other hand, if you (be it Bretonnant or Gallo) identify Brittany with a certain language, a certain culture and so forth, then there is a problem. Perhaps a core problem of your cause?

We should better talk about "Upper Brittany" or "Roman Brittany" in this case : after all, "Gallo" only means "French" or "Frenchified/Gallicized" in Breton.

Yes, patronym Le Gallou.

[Cirrus]

Originally Posted by Carnyx

It's not my opinion, I don't consider them foreign to the Breton identity, on the contrary, I think they are as Bretons as Western ones.
In regard to Gallos and what you said, what I mean is that you don't have to speak Breton to be and feel Breton if you accept the Romance influence in Upper Brittany.

Of course, and I agree with you here. That's what I said :

Originally Posted by Cirrus

Brittany has always been bi-cultural, and it would be sensless IMO, to separate the Celtic and the Roman part of this country.

What I meant when I said "I don't think that there is a Gallo identity stricto sensu" was that Eastern Brittany, with its Romance culture, is just as Breton as the Western part of the country. There are just two parts of the same land, and I don't separate a Breton (Western) and a Gallo identity, since both are our common legacy.

Originally Posted by Carnyx

On the other hand, if you (be it Bretonnant or Gallo) identify Brittany with a certain language, a certain culture and so forth, then there is a problem. Perhaps a core problem of your cause?

Yes, and that was a problem in the genesis of Breton nationalism. If nationalists wanted an only Breton-speaking Brittany, they should have rather fight for a Western-Breton nationalism than a nationalism for the whole Brittany.
And this is still a problem with Breton nationalism nowadays. I'm not a Breton militant myself, I'm only a "anti-Jacobin", but I think that there should be a debate on this point [the language] between them (the other big problem being, of course, that the Breton movement is mostly on the left-side of the politcal spectrum - but that's another story).

[Youenn]

Originally Posted by Cirrus

But in fact, Breton nationalism has never really been an ethnic nationalism, but rather an "historical" one.

I don't think historical nationalism exists really, if it was the case in France, a province like the Bourgogne will claim his independence, same for Franche Compté. In reality these provinces were independent like Brittany but ethnically French. For this reason a specific nationalism is absent there.

It is the lingua franca of the Breton movement, but in Brittany and even within the Emsav, all the Bretons speak French now.

When I used "lingua franca", I wanted say it's our symbolic language for western as eastern Bretons. French is used because we are frenchized.

Another fact is that French was also a language used in Brittany before the French annexion.

Like in other royal courts in Europe. Even today, the English royal schibboleth are in french (« honni soit qui mal y pense » « Dieu et mon droit »).

Yes, and that was a problem in the genesis of Breton nationalism.

For who is it a problem ?

Yes, but like Carnyx said, I'm afraid it is only because Breton is more "fashion" than Gallo.

Will the Breton language will be more fashion than Gallo as now if the eastern part wasn't originally Celtic and if Breton migrants weren't settled there ? I don't think so.

[Menydh]

Originally Posted by Youenn

I don't think historical nationalism exists really, if it was the case in France, a province like the Bourgogne will claim his independence, same for Franche Compté. In reality these provinces were independent like Brittany but ethnically French. For this reason a specific nationalism is absent there.

You mean that the Bourgognons have never been a distinct identity, that they never formed one, else? or just that it doesn't compare to the Breton for some... [explain] reason?

[Laocoon]

Their wish for Europe: