| Revision as of 13:35, 2 June 2011 editChaosname (talk | contribs)139 editsNo edit summary← Previous edit | Revision as of 13:36, 2 June 2011 edit undoChaosname (talk | contribs)139 edits ←Replaced content with 'YOU ENGLISH PEOPLE ARE WAKAKAKAKAKKA borat its nice'Next edit → | ||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| YOU ENGLISH PEOPLE ARE WAKAKAKAKAKKA borat its nice | |||
| Totowers.jpgTotowers.jpgTotowers.jpgTotowers.jpgTotowers.jpgTotowers.jpgTotowers.jpgTotowers.jpgTotowers.jpgTotowers.jpgTotowers.jpgTotowers.jpgTotowers.jpgTotowers.jpgTotowers.jpgTotowers.jpgTotowers.jpgTotowers.jpgTotowers.jpgTotowers.jpgTotowers.jpgTotowers.jpgTotowers.jpgTotowers.jpgTotowers.jpgTotowers.jpgTotowers.jpgTotowers.jpgTotowers.jpgfsdgfsdfsdgfsdfsd | |||
| {{sprotect2}}gfsdfsd | |||
| {{sprotect2}}gfsdfsd | |||
| {{sprotect2}}gfsdfsd | |||
| {{sprotect2}}gfsdfsd | |||
| {{sprotect2}}gfsdfsd | |||
| {{sprotect2}}gfsdfsd | |||
| {{sprotect2}}gfsdfsd | |||
| {{sprotect2}}gfsdfsd | |||
| {{sprotect2}}gfsdfsd | |||
| {{sprotect2}}gfsdfsd | |||
| {{sprotect2}}gfsdfsd | |||
| {{sprotect2}}gfsdfsd | |||
| {{sprotect2}}gfsdfsd | |||
| {{sprotect2}}gfsdfsd | |||
| {{sprotect2}}gfsdfsd | |||
| {{sprotect2}}gfsdfsd | |||
| {{sprotect2}}gfsdfsd | |||
| {{sprotect2}}gfsdfsd | |||
| {{sprotect2}}gfsdfsd | |||
| {{sprotect2}}gfsdfsd | |||
| {{sprotect2}}gfsdfsd | |||
| {{sprotect2}}gfsdfsd | |||
| {{sprotect2}}gfsdfsd | |||
| {{sprotect2}}gfsdfsd | |||
| {{sprotect2}}gfsdfsd | |||
| {{sprotect2}}gfsdfsd | |||
| {{sprotect2}}gfsdfsd | |||
| {{sprotect2}}gfsdfsd | |||
| {{sprotect2}}gfsdfsd | |||
| {{sprotect2}}gfsdfsd | |||
| {{sprotect2}}gfsdfsd | |||
| {{sprotect2}}gfsdfsd | |||
| {{sprotect2}} | |||
| {{sprotect2}} | |||
| {{Infobox Ethnic group | |||
| |group = English people | |||
| |image = ] | |||
| |caption= | |||
| 1<sup>st</sup> row: ] • ] • ] • ] • ] • ] • ] | |||
| 2<sup>nd</sup> row: ] • ] • ] • ] • ] • ] • ] | |||
| 3<sup>rd</sup> row: ] • ] • ] • ] • ] • ] • ] | |||
| |population = '''90 million''' worldwide | |||
| |region | |||
| |popplace ={{Flag icon|UK}} ] 45,265,093<ref>The reports that in the 2001 UK census 92.1% of the UK population were in the White ethnic group, and that 83.6% of this group are in the English ethnic group. The UK a total population in the UK census of 58,789,194. A quick calculation shows this is equivalent to 45,265,093 people in the English ethnic group. However, this number may not represent a self-defined ethnic group, these data do not take into account non-white people who would also identify as ethnically English. The number who described their ethnic group as English in the 2001 UK census has not been published by the ].</ref> | |||
| |region1 = {{USA}} | |||
| |pop1 = 27,516,394 {{smallsup|a}} | |||
| |ref1 = <ref name="Census 2008 ACS Ancestry estimates"></ref> | |||
| |region3 = {{CAN}} | |||
| |pop3 = 6,570,015 {{smallsup|b}} | |||
| |ref3 = {{lower|<ref>(Ethnic origin) The gives 1,367,125 respondents stating their ''ethnic origin'' as English as a single response, and 5,202,890 including multiple responses, giving a combined total of 6,570,015.</ref>}} | |||
| |region4 = {{AUS}} | |||
| |pop4 = 6,358,880 {{smallsup|c}} | |||
| |ref4 = {{lower|<ref>(Ancestry) The reports 6,358,880 people of English ''ancestry'' in the 2001 ]..</ref>}} | |||
| |region5 = {{NZL}} | |||
| |pop5 = 44,202 - 281,895 | |||
| |ref5 = {{lower|<ref>(Ethnic origin) The reports 44,202 people (based on pre-assigned ethnic categories) stating they belong to the English ethnic group. The 1996 census to both the 1991 and the 2001 censuses, which had ''"a tendency for respondents to answer the 1996 question on the basis of ancestry (or descent) rather than 'ethnicity' (or cultural affiliation)"'' and reported 281,895 people with English origins; See also the figures for ']'.</ref>}} | |||
| |languages = ] | |||
| |religions = Traditionally ], but also ]s (see ]) and also ] (see ]). ]s, ], as well as other religions. (see ]). | |||
| |footnotes = {{smallsup|a}} ], {{smallsup|b}} ], {{smallsup|c}} ] | |||
| }} | |||
| ] | |||
| The '''English''' (from {{lang-ang|Englisc}}) are a ] and ] native to ], who speak ]. The English identity is of ] origin, when they were known in ] as the ''Anglecynn''. England is now a ], and the majority of English people in England are ]. Their ] is derived from the ], a ] originally from ].<ref>http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=English</ref> | |||
| Historically, the English population are descended from several ] similar peoples—the earlier ], the ] that settled in the area, including ], ], and ], collectively known as the ], who founded what was to become England (from the ] ''Englaland''), and the later ], ] and other groups. Following the ] in 1707, in which the ] became part of the ],<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://collections.europarchive.org/ukparliament/20090701100701/http://www.parliament.uk/actofunion/|publisher=parliament.uk|title=Act of Union 1707|accessdate=2010-08-26}}</ref> English customs and identity became closely aligned with ] customs and identity. | |||
| Today, some English people have recent forbears from other parts of the United Kingdom, while some are also descended from more recent immigrants from other European countries and from the ]. Through their position at the centre of the former ], the English are the source of the ], the ], ] and a variety of the globe's most popular ]s. | |||
| ==English nationality== | |||
| Although England is no longer an independent nation state, but rather a ] within the United Kingdom, the English may still be regarded as a "]" according to the '']'''s definition: a group united by factors that include "language, culture, history, or occupation of the same territory".<ref>"Nation", sense 1. ''The Oxford English Dictionary'', 2nd edtn., 1989'.</ref> | |||
| The concept of an "English nation" is far older than that of the "British nation", and the 1990s witnessed a revival in English self-consciousness.<ref name=KK-262-290>{{harvnb|Kumar|2003|pp=262–290}}</ref> This is linked to the expressions of national self-awareness of the other British nations of Wales and Scotland — which take their most solid form in the new ] political arrangements within the United Kingdom — and the waning of a shared British national identity with the growing distance between the end of the ] and the present.{{sfn|Kumar|2003|pp=}}<!--includes a link to the first 18 pages--><ref>, ], Sunday, 9 January 2000</ref><ref>, ] 1 November 2007</ref> | |||
| While prescriptions of English national identity can involve beliefs in common descent, most political ] do not consider Englishness to be dependent upon ].<ref></ref><ref>Andrea Levy, , ''The Guardian'', February 19, 2000.</ref> | |||
| Many recent migrants to England have assumed a solely ] identity, while others have developed dual or hyphenated identities.{{sfn|Condor|Gibson|Abell|2006}}<ref>"Ethnic minorities feel strong sense of identity with Britain, report reveals" Maxine Frith '']'' 8 January 2004. ; Hussain, Asifa and Millar, William Lockley (2006) ''Multicultural Nationalism'' ] p149-150 ; "Asian recruits boost England fan army" by Dennis Campbell, '']'' 18 June 2006. ; "National Identity and Community in England" (2006) ''Institute of Governance'' Briefing No.7. </ref> Use of the word "English" to describe Britons from ethnic minorities in England is complicated by most non-white people in England identifying as British rather than English. In their 2004 Annual Population Survey, the ] compared the ''ethnic'' identities of British people with their perceived ''national'' identity. They found that while 58% of white people described their nationality as "English", the vast majority of non-white people called themselves "British".<ref>"78 per cent of ] said they were British, while only 5 per cent said they were English, Scottish or Welsh", and the largest percentage of non-whites to identify as English were the people who described their ethnicity as "]" (37%).</ref> | |||
| ===Relationship to Britishness=== | |||
| It is unclear how many British people consider themselves English. In the ], respondents were invited to state their ethnicity, but while there were ] for '] and for '], there were none for 'English', or '], who were subsumed into the general heading 'White British'.<ref> (]; see p. 43); see also .</ref> Following complaints about this, the 2011 census will "allow respondents to record their English, Welsh, Scottish, Northern Irish, Irish or other identity."<ref>.</ref> Another complication in defining the English is a common tendency for the words "English" and "British" to be used interchangeably, especially overseas. In his study of English identity, ] describes a common slip of the tongue in which people say "English, I mean British". He notes that this slip is normally made only by the English themselves and by foreigners: "Non-English members of the United Kingdom rarely say 'British' when they mean 'English'". Kumar suggests that although this blurring is a sign of England's dominant position with the UK, it is also "problematic for the English when it comes to conceiving of their national identity. It tells of the difficulty that most English people have of distinguishing themselves, in a collective way, from the other inhabitants of the British Isles".{{sfn|Kumar|2003|pp=1-2}} | |||
| In 1965, the historian ] wrote, | |||
| :"When the '']'' was launched a generation ago, "England" was still an all-embracing word. It meant indiscriminately England and Wales; Great Britain; the United Kingdom; and even the British Empire. Foreigners used it as the name of a ] and indeed continue to do so. ], by origin a ], was not ashamed to describe himself as "Prime Minister of England" Now terms have become more rigorous. The use of "England" except for a geographic area brings protests, especially from the ]."<ref>A. J. P. Taylor, ''English History, 1914-1945'' (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1965), p. v</ref> | |||
| However, although Taylor believed this blurring effect was dying out, in his book ''The Isles'' (1999), ] lists numerous examples in history books of "British" still being used to mean "English" and vice versa.<ref>Norman Davies, ''The Isles'' (1999), </ref> | |||
| In December 2010, ] of '']'', analysing the use of “English” over “British”, argued that English identity, rather than growing, had existed all along but has recently been unmasked from behind a veneer of Britishness.<ref>Matthew Parris, in ''The Spectator'' dated 18 December 2010: “With a shrug of the shoulders, England is becoming a nation once again”.</ref> | |||
| ===English ethnicity=== | |||
| The conventional view of English origins is that the English are primarily descended from the ], ] tribes that migrated to ] following the end of the ], with assimilation of later migrants such as the ] and ]. This version of history is considered by some historians and geneticists as simplistic or even incorrect. Recently, historians have questioned the the asumption that the English are primarily descended from Anglo-Saxons. Based on a re-estimation of the number of settlers, there is a view that it is highly unlikely that the existing British Celtic population was substantially displaced by the Anglo-Saxons, and the latter were merely a ruling elite who imposed their culture on the local populations.<ref>Michael Jones, ''The End of Roman Britain'', pp.8-38.</ref><ref>See also "Britain AD: a quest for Arthur, England and the Anglo-Saxons" by ]</ref> However, many historians, while making allowance for British survival, still hold to the view that there was significant displacement of the indigenous population.<ref>{{Cite journal|format=pdf|url= http://www.ucl.ac.uk/mace-lab/macepdf/Thomas-PRSB-06-Apartheid.pdf|title=Evidence for an apartheid-like social structure in early Anglo-Saxon England|author= Mark G. Thomas, Michael P. H. Stumpf and Heinrich Hark|publisher= Royal Society|accessdate=21 January 2010}}</ref><ref>Andrew Tyrrell, ''Corpus Saxon'' in ''Social Identity in Early Medieval Britain'' by Andrew Tyrrell and William O. Frazer (London: Leicester University Press. 2000)</ref> | |||
| In any event, the ], particularly in their use of ] such as ], ], and ], held on for several centuries in parts of England such as ], ], ], ], the ] (particularly ] and ]), ], ], and parts of ] (particularly ]). However, the notion of the Anglo-Saxon English has traditionally been important in defining English identity and distinguishing the English from their ] neighbours, such as the ], ], ] and ]. Historian Catherine Hills describes what she calls the "]" of the English: | |||
| :The arrival of the Anglo-Saxons ... is still perceived as an important and interesting event because it is believed to have been a key factor in the identity of the present inhabitants of the British Isles, involving migration on such a scale as to permanently change the population of south-east Britain, and making the English a distinct and different people from the ]ic ], ] and ] ....this is an example of a national origin myth ... and shows why there are seldom simple answers to questions about origins.<ref>Catherine Hills, ''The Origins of the English'' (London: Duckworth, Duckworth Debates in Archaeology, 2003), p. 18, ISBN 0-7156-3191-8</ref> | |||
| A popular interest in English identity is evident in the recent reporting of scientific and sociological investigations of the English, in which complex results are heavily simplified. In 2002, the ] used the headline "English and Welsh are races apart" to report a genetic survey of test subjects from ]s in England and Wales,<ref>, '']'', 30 June 2002</ref> while in September 2006, '']'' reported that a survey of first names and surnames in the UK had identified ] in ] as "the 'most English' place in England with 88.58% of residents having an English ethnic background".<ref>"", Robert Winnett and Holly Watt, '']'', 10 June 2006</ref> The '']'' printed an article with the headline "We're all Germans! (and we have been for 1,600 years)".<ref>Julie Wheldon. , ], 19 July 2006</ref> In all these cases, the language of race is employed by the journalists.<ref>The BBC article claims a 50-100% "wipeout" of "]" by Anglo-Saxon "invaders", while the original article ('''' Michael E. Weale ''et al.'', in ''Molecular Biology and Evolution'' 19 ) claims only a 50-100% "contribution" of "Anglo-Saxons" to the current Central English ''male'' population, with samples deriving only from central England; the conclusions of this study have been questioned in Cristian Capelli, ''et al.'', '''' '']'', 13 (2003). The ''Times'' article reports Richard Webber's ''OriginsInfo'' database, which does not use the word 'ethnic' and acknowledges that its conclusions are unsafe for many groups; see , ''OriginsInfo''.</ref> | |||
| In addition, several recent books, including those of ] and ], have argued that the recent genetic studies in fact do not show a clear dividing line between the English and their 'Celtic' neighbours, but that there is a gradual ] change from west coast Britain to east coast Britain. They suggest that the majority of the ancestors of British peoples were the original palaeolithic settlers of Great Britain, and that the differences that exist between the east and west coasts of Great Britain though not large, are deep in prehistory, mostly originating in the upper palaeolithic and Mesolithic (15,000-7,000 years ago). Furthermore, Oppenheimer states that genetic testing has proven that "75% of British and Irish ancestors arrive between 15,000 and 7,500 years ago" (that is, long before the arrival of the Anglo-Saxons).<ref></ref> | |||
| Oppenheimer also claims that ] split from Indo-European earlier than previously suspected, some 6000 years ago, while English split from ] before the Roman period. Oppenheimer believes that a Germanic language that became English was spoken by the tribes of what is now England long before the arrival of the Anglo-Saxon and also discounts the view that the people of the area were ever Celtic.<ref>http://www.omniglot.com/blog/?p=516</ref><ref name="opp">Oppenheimer, S. (2006). The Origins of the British: A Genetic Detective Story: Constable and Robinson, London. ISBN 978-1-84529-158-7.</ref> | |||
| ==History of English people== | |||
| {{Main|History of England}} | |||
| ===Antiquity=== | |||
| {{See|Genetic history of the British Isles|Settlement of Great Britain and Ireland}} | |||
| The term "English" is not used to refer to the earliest inhabitants of the area that would become England: ] ]s, ]ic ], and ] colonists.<ref name="OED"/> This is because up to and during the ], the region now called England was not a distinct country; all the native inhabitants of Britain spoke ] and were regarded as ] (or Brythons) divided into many ]s. The word "English" refers to a heritage that began with the arrival of the ] in the 5th century, who settled lands already inhabited by ] tribes. That heritage then comes to include later arrivals, including Scandinavians, ], as well as those Romano-Britons who still lived in England.<ref name="OED"> | |||
| {{cite book | |||
| |last=Simpson | |||
| |first=John | |||
| |coauthors=Weiner, Edmund | |||
| |title=The Oxford English Dictionary: second edition | |||
| |publisher=] | |||
| |date=1989-03-30 | |||
| |location=] | |||
| |url=http://www.oed.com | |||
| |pages=English | |||
| |isbn=0198611862 }}</ref> | |||
| ===Early Middle Ages=== | |||
| {{further|], ], ], ], ]}} | |||
| ]. From ''A Restitution of Decayed Intelligence'' by ] (1605)]] | |||
| The first people to be called 'English' were the ], a group of closely related ] tribes that began migrating to eastern and southern ], from southern ] and northern ], in the 5th century AD, after the ]. The Anglo-Saxons gave their name to England (''Engla land'', meaning "Land of the Angles") and to the English. | |||
| ] at ], ].]] | |||
| The Anglo-Saxons arrived in a land that was already populated by people commonly referred to as the ']'—the descendants of the native Brythonic-speaking population that lived in the area of Britain under Roman rule during the 1st-5th centuries AD. The multi-ethnic nature of the Roman Empire meant that small numbers of other peoples may have also been present in England before the Anglo-Saxons arrived. There is archaeological evidence, for example, of an early North African presence in a Roman garrison at Aballava, now Burgh-by-Sands, in Cumbria; a fourth-century inscription says that the Roman military unit ''Numerus Maurorum Aurelianorum'' ("unit of Aurelian Moors") from Muretania (Morocco) was stationed there.<ref>, Channel 4, accessed 21 December 2009.</ref> | |||
| The exact nature of ] and their relationship with the Romano-British is a matter of debate. Traditionally, it was believed that a mass invasion by various Anglo-Saxon tribes largely displaced the indigenous British population in southern and eastern ] (modern day England with the exception of ]). This was supported by the writings of ], the only contemporary historical account of the period, describing slaughter and starvation of native Britons by invading tribes ('']'').<ref></ref> | |||
| Added to this was the fact that the ] contains no more than a handful of words borrowed from ] sources (although the names of some towns, cities, rivers etc. do have Brythonic or pre-Brythonic origins, becoming more frequent towards the west of Britain).<ref></ref> However, this view has been re-evaluated by some archaeologists and historians since the 1960s, and more recently supported by genetic studies,<ref name="opp"/> who see only minimal evidence for mass displacement. Archaeologist ] has stated that he "can't see any evidence for ''bona fide'' mass migrations after the ]."<ref>''Britain BC: Life in Britain and Ireland before the Romans'' by ], p. 122. Harper Perennial. ISBN 0-00-712693-X.</ref> | |||
| While the historian Malcolm Todd writes "It is much more likely that a large proportion of the British population remained in place and was progressively dominated by a Germanic aristocracy, in some cases marrying into it and leaving Celtic names in the, admittedly very dubious, early lists of Anglo-Saxon dynasties. But how we identify the surviving Britons in areas of predominantly Anglo-Saxon settlement, either archaeologically or linguistically, is still one of the deepest problems of early English history."<ref>]. , in Cameron, Keith. ''The nation: myth or reality?''. Intellect Books, 1994, accessed December 21, 2009.</ref> | |||
| In a survey of the genes of British and Irish men, even those British regions that were most genetically similar to (Germanic speaking) continental regions were still more genetically British than continental: "When included in the PC analysis, the Frisians were more 'Continental' than any of the British samples, although they were somewhat closer to the British ones than the North German/Denmark sample. For example, the part of mainland Britain that has the most Continental input is Central England, but even here the ] frequency, not below 44% (Southwell), is higher than the 35% observed in the Frisians. These results demonstrate that even with the choice of Frisians as a source for the Anglo-Saxons, there is a clear indication of a continuing indigenous component in the English paternal genetic makeup."<ref name="y-chrom">Capelli, C., N. Redhead, J. K. Abernethy, F. Gratrix, J. F. Wilson, T. Moen, T. Hervig, M. Richards, M. P.H. Stumpf, P. A. Underhill, P. Bradshaw, A. Shaha, M. G. Thomas, N. Bradman and D. B. Goldstein '''' '']'', 13 (2003).</ref> | |||
| ===Vikings and the Danelaw=== | |||
| {{See|Viking|Danelaw}} | |||
| From about AD 800 waves of ] ] assaults on the coastlines of the ] were gradually followed by a succession of Danish settlers in England. At first, the Vikings were very much considered a separate people from the English. This separation was enshrined when ] signed the ] to establish the ], a division of England between English and Danish rule, with the Danes occupying northern and eastern England.<ref>''The Age of Athelstan'' by Paul Hill (2004), Tempus Publishing. ISBN 0-7524-2566-8</ref> | |||
| However, Alfred's successors subsequently won military victories against the Danes, incorporating much of the Danelaw into the nascent kingdom of England. Danish invasions continued into the 11th century, and there were both English and Danish kings in the period following the unification of England (for example, ] (978–1013 and 1014–1016) was English but ] (1016–1035) was Danish). | |||
| Gradually, the Danes in England came to be seen as 'English'. They had a noticeable impact on the ]: many English words, such as ''anger'', ''ball'', ''egg'', ''got'', ''knife'', ''take'', and ''they'', are ],<ref>'''' by Douglas Harper (2001), . Retrieved 10 July 2006.</ref> and place names that end in ''-thwaite'' and ''-by'' are Scandinavian in origin.<ref>''The Adventure of English'', ], 2003. Pg 22</ref> | |||
| ===English unification=== | |||
| {{further|], ], ]}} | |||
| ]s.]] | |||
| The English population was not politically unified until the 10th century. Before then, it consisted of a number of ]s which gradually coalesced into a ] of seven powerful states, the most powerful of which were ] and ]. The English ] began to form when the Anglo-Saxon kingdoms united against Danish Viking invasions, which began around 800 AD. Over the following century and a half England was for the most part a politically unified entity, and remained permanently so after 959. | |||
| The ] of England was formed in 937 by ] of ] after the ],<ref>'''': '''Historic Figures: '''. Retrieved 30 October 2006.</ref><ref>'''' by ], ] website. Retrieved 30 October 2006.</ref> as Wessex grew from a relatively small kingdom in the South West to become the founder of the Kingdom of the English, incorporating all ] kingdoms and the ].<ref name="Rowse">], ''The Story of Britain'', Artus 1979 ISBN 0-297-83311-1</ref> | |||
| ===Norman and Angevin rule=== | |||
| ] of England (right) at the Norman court, from the ]]] | |||
| {{further|]}} | |||
| The ] during 1066 brought Anglo-Saxon and Danish rule of England to an end, as the new ] elite almost universally replaced the Anglo-Saxon aristocracy and church leaders. After the conquest, "English" normally included all natives of England, whether they were of Anglo-Saxon, Scandinavian or Celtic ancestry, to distinguish them from the Norman invaders, who were regarded as "Norman" even if born in England, for a generation or two after the Conquest.<ref>'']'', 2nd edition, s.v. 'English'.</ref> The Norman dynasty ruled England for 87 years until the death of ] in 1154, when the succession passed to ], ] (based in France), and England became part of the ] until 1399. | |||
| Various contemporary sources suggest that within fifty years of the invasion most of the Normans outside the royal court had switched to English, with ] remaining the prestige language of government and law largely out of social inertia. For example, Orderic Vitalis, a historian born in 1075 and the son of a Norman knight, said that he learned French only as a second language. Anglo-Norman continued to be used by the Plantagenet kings until ] came to the throne.<ref></ref> Over time the English language became more important even in the court, and the Normans were gradually assimilated, until, by the 14th Century, both rulers and subjects regarded themselves as English and spoke the English language.<ref></ref> | |||
| Despite the assimilation of the Normans, the distinction between 'English' and 'French' survived in official documents long after it had fallen out of common use, in particular in the legal phrase '']'' (a rule by which a ] had to prove an unidentified murdered body found on their soil to be that of an Englishman, rather than a Norman, if they wanted to avoid a fine). This law was abolished in 1340.<ref>], s.v. 'Englishry'.</ref> | |||
| ===In the United Kingdom=== | |||
| {{Image label begin|image=Flags of the Union Jack.svg|width={{{width|350}}}|float={{{float|right}}}}} | |||
| {{Image label small|x=0.03|y=0.23|scale={{{width|350}}}|text=] <br />(])}} | |||
| {{Image label small|x=0.46|y=0.23|scale={{{width|350}}}|text=] <br />(])}} | |||
| {{Image label small|x=0.32|y=0.49|scale={{{width|350}}}|text=]}} | |||
| {{Image label small|x=0.70|y=0.51|scale={{{width|350}}}|text=] <br />(])}} | |||
| {{Image label small|x=0.52|y=0.76|scale={{{width|350}}}|text=]}} | |||
| {{Image label end}} | |||
| {{Main|History of the formation of the United Kingdom}} | |||
| Since the 18th century, England has been one part of a wider political entity covering all or part of the ], which today is called the ]. ] was ] by England by the ], which incorporated Wales into the English state.<ref>: '''Ireland on the Net''' Website. Retrieved 23 June 2006.</ref> A new British identity was subsequently developed when ] became ] as well, and expressed the desire to be known as the monarch of Britain.<ref>''A History of Britain: The British Wars 1603-1776'' by ], BBC Worldwide. ISBN 0-563-53747-7.</ref> | |||
| In 1707, England formed a union with ] by passing an ] in March 1707 that ratified the ]. The ] had previously passed its own Act of Union, so the ] was born on May 1, 1707. In 1801, another ] formed a union between the Kingdom of Great Britain and the ], creating the ]. In 1922, about two thirds of the Irish population (those who lived in twenty-six of the thirty-two counties of Ireland), left the United Kingdom to form the ]. The remainder became | |||
| the ], although this name was not introduced until 1927, after some years in which the term "United Kingdom" had been little used. | |||
| Throughout the history of the UK, the English have been dominant in population and in political weight. As a consequence, notions of 'Englishness' and 'Britishness' are often very similar. At the same time, after the Union of 1707, the English, along with the other peoples of the British Isles, have been encouraged to think of themselves as British rather than to identify themselves with the constituent nations.<ref>''The English'', ] 1998<!---Page reference needed---></ref> | |||
| ===Immigration and assimilation=== | |||
| {{See also|Historical immigration to Great Britain|Immigration to the United Kingdom (1922-present day)}} | |||
| Although England has not been conquered since the Norman conquest nor extensively settled since, it has been the destination of varied numbers of migrants at different periods from the seventeenth century. While some members of these groups maintain a separate ethnic identity, others have ] and ] with the English. Since ]'s ] in 1656, there have been waves of ] immigration from ] in the nineteenth century and from ] in the twentieth.<ref>: '''European Jewish Press'''. Retrieved 21 July 2006.</ref> | |||
| After the French king ] declared ] illegal in 1685 with the ], an estimated 50,000 Protestant ]s fled to England.<ref></ref> Due to sustained and sometimes mass emigration from ], current estimates indicate that around 6 million people in the UK have at least one grandparent born in Ireland.<ref>'''' by Owen Bowcott '''The Guardian''', 13 September 2006. Retrieved 9 January 2006.</ref> | |||
| There has been a ] presence in England since at least the 16th century due to the ] and an Indian presence since the mid 19th century because of the ].<ref>'''', Asian and Black History in Britain, 1500-1850: '''UK government website'''. Retrieved 21 July 2006.</ref> ] and ] proportions have grown in England as immigration from the British Empire and the subsequent ] was encouraged due to labour shortages during post-war rebuilding.<ref> The National Archives Accessed October 2006</ref> | |||
| However, these groups are often still considered to be ethnic minorities and research has shown that black and Asian people in the UK are more likely to identify as British rather than with one of the state's four constituent nations, including England.<ref>{{cite news|url=http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/news/article-23386024-ethnic-minorities-more-likely-to-feel-british-than-white-people-says-research.do|title=Ethnic minorities more likely to feel British than white people, says research|work=Evening Standard|date=18 February 2007|accessdate=18 September 2010}}</ref> | |||
| ===Current national and political identity=== | |||
| The 1990s witnessed a resurgence of English national identity.<ref name=Economist>{{cite news|url=http://www.economist.com/node/8599103?story_id=8599103|title=British identity: Waning|work=The Economist|date=25 January 2007|accessdate=9 February 2011}}</ref> Survey data shows a rise in the number of people in England describing their national identity as English and a fall in the number describing themselves as British.<ref>{{cite news|url=http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2007/jan/24/labourleadership.britishidentity|title=When British isn't always best|work=The Guardian|date=24 January 2007|accessdate=9 February 2011}}</ref> Scholars and journalists have noted a rise in English self-consciousness, with increased use of the ], particularly at football matches where the ] was previously more commonly flown by fans.{{sfn|Kumar|2003|p=262}}<ref>{{cite news|url=http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article1083305.ece|title=St George unfurls his flag (made in China) once again|work=The Times|first=Ben|last=Hoyle|date=8 June 2006|accessdate=10 February 2011}}</ref> | |||
| This perceived rise in English self-consciousness has generally been attributed to the ] in the late 1990s of some powers to the ] and ].<ref name=Economist/><ref>{{cite news|url=http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-430910/Dont-British-England.html|title=Don't call us British, we're from England|work=Daily Mail|first=Matthew|last=Hickley|date=23 January 2007|accessdate=9 February 2011}}</ref> In policy areas for which the devolved administrations in Scotland, Wales and ] have responsibility, the UK Parliament votes on laws that consequently only apply to England. Because the Westminster Parliament is composed of MPs from throughout the UK, this has given rise to the "]", a reference to the situation in which MPs representing constituencies outside England can vote on matters affecting only England, but MPs cannot vote on the same matters in relation to the other parts of the UK.<ref>{{cite news|url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/82358.stm|title=The West Lothian Question|publisher=BBC News|date=1 June 1998|accessdate=9 February 2011}}</ref> Consequently, groups such as the ] have called for the creation of a ], claiming that there is now a discriminatory democratic deficit against the English. The establishment of an English parliament has also been backed by a number of Scottish and Welsh nationalists.<ref>{{cite news|url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/6081130.stm|title=Fresh call for English Parliament|publisher=BBC News|date=24 October 2006|accessdate=9 February 2011}}</ref><ref>{{cite news|url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/6197143.stm|title=Welsh nod for English Parliament|publisher=BBC News|date=20 December 2006|accessdate=9 February 2011}}</ref> Writer ] has suggested that like most dominant groups, the English have only demonstrated interest in their ethnic self-definition when they were feeling oppressed.<ref>Paul Johnson is quoted by Kumar {{harv|Kumar|2003|p=266}}</ref> | |||
| ] argues that "In the early years of devolution...there was little sign" of an English backlash against devolution for Scotland and Wales, but that more recently survey data shows tentative signs of "a form of English nationalism...beginning to emerge among the general public".<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.ippr.org.uk/members/download.asp?f=/ecomm/files/Is_An_English_Backlash_Emerging.pdf&a=skip|title=Is an English backlash emerging? Reactions to devolution ten years on|first=John|last=Curtice|publisher=Institute for Public Policy Research|date=February 2010|accessdate=9 February 2011|page=3}}</ref> Michael Kenny, ] and Richard Hayton, meanwhile, argue that the resurgence in English nationalism predates devolution, being observable in the early 1990s, but that this resurgence does not necessarily have negative implciations for the future of the UK as a political union.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.ippr.org/members/download.asp?f=/ecomm/files/beyond_the_constitution.pdf&a=skip|title=Beyond the constitution? Englishness in a post-devolved Britain|first1=Michael|last1=Kenny|first2=Richard|last2=English|first3=Richard|last3=Hayton|publisher=Institute for Public Policy Research|date=February 2008|accessdate=9 February 2011|page=3}}</ref> Others question whether devolution has led to a rise in English national identity at all, arguing that survey data fails to portray the complex nature of national identities, with many people considering themselves both English ''and'' British.{{sfn|Condor|Gibson|Abell|2006|p=128}} | |||
| Recent surveys of public opinion on the establishment of an English parliament have given widely varying conclusions. In the first five years of devolution for Scotland and Wales, support in England for the establishment of an English parliament was low at between 16 and 19 per cent, according to successive ]s.<ref>{{cite journal|first=Robert|last=Hazell|year=2006|title=The English Question|journal=Publius|volume=36|issue=1|pages=37–56|doi=10.1093/publius/pjj012}}</ref> A report, also based on the British Social Attitudes Survey, published in December 2010 suggests that only 29 per cent of people in England support the establishment of an English parliament, though this figure had risen from 17 per cent in 2007.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.natcen.ac.uk/media/606961/nat%20british%20social%20attitudes%20survey%20summary%207.pdf|first1=Rachel|last1=Ormston|first2=John|last2=Curtice|title=Resentment or contentment? Attitudes towards the Union ten years on|publisher=National Centre for Social Research|date=December 2010|accessdate=9 February 2011}}</ref> | |||
| One 2007 poll carried out for ] '']'', however, found that 61 per cent would support such a parliament being established.<ref>{{cite news|url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/6264823.stm|title='Most' support English parliament|publisher=BBC|date=16 January 2007|accessdate=9 February 2011}}</ref> Krishan Kumar notes that support for measures to ensure that only English MPs can vote on legislation that applies only to England is generally higher than that for the establishment of an English parliament, although support for both varies depending on the timing of the opinion poll and the wording of the question.{{sfn|Kumar|2010|p=484}} Electoral support for English nationalist parties is also low, even though there is public support for many of the policies they espouse.<ref>{{cite journal|first=Colin|last=Copus|title=English national parties in post-devolution UK|journal=British Politics|volume=4|issue=3|year=2009|pages=363–385|doi=10.1057/bp.2009.12}}</ref> The ] gained just 64,826 votes in the ], accounting for 0.3 per cent of all votes cast in England.<ref>{{cite news|url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/shared/election2010/results/region/48.stm|title=Full England scoreboard|work=Election 2010|publisher=BBC News|accessdate=9 February 2011}}</ref> Kumar argues that "despite devolution and occasional bursts of English nationalism – more an expression of exasperation with the Scots or Northern Irish – the English remain on the whole satisfied with current constitutional arrangements".{{sfn|Kumar|2010|p=478}} | |||
| ==English ancestry abroad== | |||
| ===English diaspora=== | |||
| {{See|English American|Anglo-Argentine|English Canadian|English Chilean|Anglo-African|English Australian|New Zealand European}} | |||
| From the earliest times English people have left England to settle in other parts of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, but it is not possible to identify their numbers, as British censuses have historically not invited respondents to identify themselves as English.<ref> (]; see p. 43)</ref> However, the census does record place of birth, revealing that 8.08% of Scotland's population,<ref>, accessed November 16, 2007.</ref> 3.66% of the population of ]<ref>, p. 10.</ref> and 20% of the Welsh population were born in England.<ref>, ''National Statistics'', 8 January 2004.</ref> Similarly, the census of the ] does not collect information on ethnicity, but it does record that there are over 200,000 people living in Ireland who were born in ]. | |||
| ] citizens who claim some English ancestry in the census. Dark red and brown colours indicate a higher density: highest in the northeast as well as Utah and surrounding areas. (see also ]).]] | |||
| English emigrant and ethnic descent communities are found across the world, and in some places, settled in significant numbers. Substantial populations descended from English colonists and immigrants exist in the ], ], ], ] and ]. | |||
| In the ], 24,509,692 Americans described their ] as wholly or partly English. In addition, 1,035,133 recorded British ancestry.<ref>, table PHC-T-43.</ref> In the ] 50 million Americans claimed English ancestry.<ref>, American Demographics, December 1, 2001</ref> | |||
| In the ], 'English' was the most common ethnic origin (ethnic origin refers to the ethnic or cultural group(s) to which the respondent's ancestors belong<ref> ]</ref>) recorded by respondents; 6,570,015 people described themselves as wholly or partly English, 16% of the population.<ref>Staff. , ''Statistics Canada'', 2006.</ref> On the other hand people identifying as Canadian but not English may have previously identified as English before the option of identifying as Canadian was available.<ref>According to , (p.7) "...the presence of the Canadian example has led to an increase in Canadian being reported and has had an impact on the counts of other groups, especially for French, English, Irish and Scottish. People who previously reported these origins in the census had the tendency to now report Canadian."</ref> | |||
| In ], the ] recorded 6,298,945 people who described their ancestry, but not ethnicity, as 'English'. 1,425,559 of these people recorded that both their parents were born overseas. | |||
| Significant numbers of people with at least some English ] also live in ] and ], as well as in ], ], ], ], and ]. Most of the ] are in fact British Pakistanis from England who have returned to their ancestral country.{{citation needed|date=October 2010}} | |||
| Since the 1980s there have been increasingly large numbers of English people, estimated at over 3 million, permanently or semi-permanently living in ] and ], drawn there by the climate and cheaper house prices.<ref> by Giles Tremlett. ''The Guardian'', Friday 24 July 2009</ref> | |||
| ==Culture== | |||
| {{Expand section|date=September 2009}} | |||
| {{further|]}} | |||
| The culture of England is sometimes difficult to separate clearly from the culture of the United Kingdom,<ref>{{cite web|last=Carr|first=Raymond|5 Apr 5 2003|title=invention of Great Britain, The |publisher=The Spectator}} </ref> so influential has English culture been on the cultures of the ] and, on the other hand, given the extent to which other cultures have influenced life in England. | |||
| ==See also== | |||
| {{columns | |||
| |col1width=12em | |||
| |col1 = | |||
| * ] | |||
| * ] | |||
| * ] | |||
| * ] | |||
| * ] | |||
| |col2width=20em | |||
| |col2 = | |||
| * ] | |||
| * ] <small>(historical estimates)</small> | |||
| * '']'' <small>(] TV programme, 2006)</small> | |||
| |col3width=21em | |||
| |col3 = | |||
| * ] | |||
| * ] | |||
| * ] | |||
| }} | |||
| '''Language:''' | |||
| * ] | |||
| * ] | |||
| * ] | |||
| * ] | |||
| * ] | |||
| '''Diaspora:''' | |||
| * ] | |||
| * ] | |||
| * ] | |||
| * ] | |||
| * ] | |||
| * ] | |||
| * ] | |||
| * ] | |||
| * ] | |||
| * ] | |||
| * ] | |||
| * ] | |||
| * ] | |||
| * ] | |||
| ==Notes== | |||
| {{Reflist|3}} | |||
| ==References== | |||
| * Great for tracking down historical inhabitants of England. | |||
| *{{cite journal|url=http://www.psych.lancs.ac.uk/people/uploads/SusanCondor20080120T164935.pdf|first1=Susan|last1=Condor|first2=Stephen|last2=Gibson|first3=Jackie|last3=Abell|year=2006|title=English identity and ethnic diversity in the context of UK constitutional change|journal=Ethnicities|volume=6|issue=2|pages=123–158|doi=10.1177/1468796806063748|ref=harv}} | |||
| * {{cite book |title=Watching the English |author=Kate Fox |year=2004 |publisher=Hodder & Stoughton |isbn=0340818867}} | |||
| * {{cite book|ref=harv |title=The Making of English National Identity |first=Krishan |last=Kumar |year=2003 |publisher=Cambridge University Press |isbn=0521777364}} | |||
| *{{cite journal|ref=harv|first=Krishan|last=Kumar|year=2010|title=Negotiating English identity: Englishness, Britishness and the future of the United Kingdom|journal=Nations and Nationalism|volume=16|issue=3|pages=469–487|doi=10.1111/j.1469-8129.2010.00442.x}} | |||
| *{{cite book |title=The English |first=Jeremy |last=Paxman |year=1999 |publisher=Penguin Books Ltd |isbn=0140267239}} | |||
| ==Further reading== | |||
| * {{cite book |title=The Idea of English Ethnicity |author=] |year=2008 |publisher=Blackwell Publishers |isbn=1-4051-0129-6}} | |||
| * Articles on England and the English | |||
| * Information on England | |||
| * Map of England ("Anglia") circa 1564. | |||
| * ; BBC; 3 December 2001. | |||
| * showing 49,138,831 people from all ethnic groups living in England. | |||
| * ; The Telegraph; 23 April 2001. | |||
| * ; CNSNews.com; 23 April 2001. | |||
| * – an anthropologist's look at the hidden rules of English behaviour. | |||
| * , by ]. | |||
| * Geoff Boxell | |||
| * BBC | |||
| * Article on the common English and Irish ethnicity | |||
| * | |||
| * | |||
| {{England topics}} | |||
| {{British peoples}} | |||
| {{British Isles}} | |||
| {{DEFAULTSORT:English People}} | |||
| <!--Categories--> | |||
| ]<!--Keep with index at start of list (eponymous category)--> | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
Revision as of 13:36, 2 June 2011
YOU ENGLISH PEOPLE ARE WAKAKAKAKAKKA borat its nice