All in it Together?

This week I thought it was time we had a history lesson.

Egbert is recognised as the first king of what might be called England.  He rose to prominence in the early 9th century.  The various peoples who lived in this half of the little offshore island the Romans had called Britannia were learning to live together, as one nation, rather than lots of squabbling tribes. His grandson Alfred the Great saw off the Vikings, and you could be excused for thinking that all was set fair for us 'English'.  Then along came the Normans, to remind us that we couldn't expect to have it all our own way. The lesson was learned - for a time - and gradually the Normans and the English grew into one nation ... who wanted things done their own way. (Can you see where this is going?)

In the course of the next millennium, this business of 'getting our own way' became a national way of life.  Time after time, we didn't get on with the neighbours.  Take Ireland, for instance (I've written here before about this, I admit).  Henry I and his fellow Normans invaded Ireland, beginning in 1169, but only did half a job of colonising the Irish.  400 years later, it was decided to settle the place properly, and lots of people were sent there en masse - mainly from Scotland - to create 'plantations' and supplant the natives.

After many more centuries their descendants, understandably, see the northern part of Ireland as their home, and are happy to stay there.  But, remembering where they came from, they are also determined to remain part of this so-called United Kingdom ... whether the rest of us, on the big island, are happy with that or not.  They're showing us they are truly English (or as we now say, British) by wanting their own way and, to bring the story completely up to date, the two sides of the population there are presently haggling over the place of the Irish and Ulster Scots languages alongside English.

Then there were the Jews.  How long they'd been here I couldn't say but Edward I wasn't happy with the situation and in 1290 he expelled the lot of them.  Gradually, they were admitted again, and relationships recovered. 100 years ago, there was great feeling for the fact that their original homeland was no longer theirs and, in his famous Declaration, our prime minister promised them that they could have the original Israel as their own.  It didn't help matters that Britain was saying sweet things to the Palestinians at the same time, making similar promises to them if they would help get the Ottomans out of the land we wanted to share with the French ... separated by the famous 'line in the sand'.  This was just one mess we got into in the wider world.  Palestine and India were the first big steps in a process of de-colonisation that took place during the mid-20th century, and much of it was badly handled, to the cost of the native peoples.

Nearer home, talking of the French, we were always squabbling with them ... so much so that they became known as 'the old enemy'!   In the 13th century, our king was so corrupt that the French invaded Kent to do something about him (he ruled - if that's the word - half of France at the time).  Then there was the Hundred Years' War, which lasted off and on for well over 100 years, in the 14th and 15th centuries.  We all remember the stories of the Duke of Marlborough, as he fought the France of Louis XIV and, in succeeding decades, came a succession of other small wars in most, if not all, of which the French were on the other side ... the song 'Hearts of Oak' was written to commemorate the many victories of 1759.  And by the end of the century we were fighting Napoleon: twenty years of war that ended at Waterloo.

Now, what about this island itself?  To our north many wars were fought with our neighbours Scotland.  Quite apart from the cross-border skirmishes before a firm line was established between the two, there were some more serious affairs, too.  Such as when Edward I decided to take a hand in resolving a succession crisis for tenure of the Scottish throne.  The resulting conflict, involving heroes like William Wallace and Robert the Bruce, is sometimes referred to as the Scottish War of Independence ... not to achieve independence from a situation of belonging, but for the security of independence from the threat of domination.  When finally the two thrones were joined, it was as a result of England not having a successor to Elizabeth I, and many Scots must have felt deserted and resentful when James VI, on taking the job, decided to move, lock stock and barrel, to London!  It was as if, having no king of their own, the English had stolen theirs!  Little wonder that it took another century before the two countries would actually unite.

I've left until last the closest nation to be offended by this English trait of 'having it all our own way'.  For centuries the Welsh had governed themselves quite happily and efficiently among the mountains and valleys. Then, not content with interfering with his northern neighbour, Edward I also invaded Wales in the late 13th century, covering the north of the country with strong castles and installing his own son as 'their prince' to replace their own.  He pronounced the Statute of Wales in 1284 and over the next two centuries or so the merger of the social and economic life of the two countries proceeded, suffering only a temporary setback as a result of the rebellion of Owain Glyndŵr about 1400.

By the time that Henry VIII's secretary Thomas Cromwell drew up the Act of Union in 1536, it was almost a formality, spreading the English county administration system over the whole country and requiring that everything official should be carried out in English.  The Act didn't actually forbid the use of Welsh, it simply set up - so far as Cromwell could see - a united government for a united country.  The country was - and, for many purposes, still is - England-and-Wales.  It's an interesting sporting insight that the 'England and Wales Cricket Board' , the organisation that governs the country's national team, is represented by the letters 'ECB' and not 'EWCB'.

In so many ways, the identity of the Principality is swallowed up in that of the Kingdom.  Over the last hundred years or so, however, moves have been made to restore the balance.  The first National Eisteddfod was held in 1861, and since 1952 all its events have been held in the Welsh language. Politically, the nationalist party Plaid Cymru was founded in 1925 and gradually grew to the prominence it holds today in the devolved government.  I learned when on holiday a couple of years ago - and have no reason to disbelieve it - that Rheilfordd Llyn Tegid, the company that runs Lake Bala Railway, was the first one to be registered in the Welsh language.

People have asked me why I should want to learn the language, when I freely admit to having no known Welsh ancestors and no Welsh connection apart from my name.  There are many partial answers to that question, one of which is a pledge made in absentia to a couple whose names I don't know, from whom I acquired a Welsh Bible and New Testament that had been given to the wife many years ago.  They had no use for them, but rather than put them out to rubbish, they sought a place where they would be treasured. They're now on my bookshelf.

As I was marshalling my thoughts for this blog, I realised another reason. With the prospect of close foreign travel being slightly more difficult after Brexit (in itself yet another example of Britain 'having its own way'), Wales is one place accessible without the need to cross water, where one can hear a language other than English spoken freely!  Many languages are heard on our streets today, the principal one of course being English.  However, just as the UK doesn't have a written constitution, it doesn't have an official language.  Being an official language in Wales, Welsh is the only language to have legal status in any part of the UK!  On that basis alone, I feel a certain - if minimal - obligation to have some knowledge of it!

As to the theme running through this piece, one of my late father's sayings was, 'Have it your own way ... you'll live the longer!'  While true, I'm not sure I'm the happier for it.