Ning, WELCOME to A2K. Even if European countries are still relatively young, their cultures are much older. The bounderies may have changed, but the people can still trace their ancestry many hundreds of years.
Well, au, when you take such an examle: may I remind you (and Ning) that there was an German king, named Louis the German (lived 804-876, reigned 843-876), that since that time there was a 'Holy Roman Empire of German Nation'?
And that France started in the very same year, with Charles the Bald) (823-877, 843-877 Emp. 875.
Since that time, it always has been France and Germany.
There are some better one's in the A2K Portal :wink:
And, yes, although Egbert became King of Wessex, he known in history as the first King of All England (not Britain! [Beware of the Scots :wink: ]).
For example 300 years ago French language were only spoken in Paris area. Other part of what is now France spoke Provencal, Breton, Alsatian, Corsican, Catalan, Basque or Flemish. (you can still hear these languages in the streets today).
"Kind of France" was more the "Kind of Paris" than the "Kind Of France". (France refered to the Paris area for 1000 years). There were a lot of other kings in what is now France (example : King of Bourgogne) and they were all in war.
There is absolutly not only one culture in France (and in most of the other european countries). For example, Chrismas is not even celebrated in the same way in northern and in southern part of France.
I think it's more or less the same thing in the other european countries.
Ning
Don't say such loud ... outside 67 and 68 ... and don't even think such nasty things in St. Denis
Walter Hinteler wrote:Ning
Don't say such loud ... outside 67 and 68 ... and don't even think such nasty things in St. Denis
I'll tell them in Alsatian
Again I ask ."What will happen to the value of the Euro if the EU falls and breaks apart like a Humpty Dumpty?"
au1929 wrote:Again I ask ."What will happen to the value of the Euro if the EU falls and breaks apart like a Humpty Dumpty?"
If EU falls there will not Euro anymore. Same thing if US falls there will not dollars anymore. Same thing for every countries.
au
Certainly you can asked everything.
And you ceratinly will continue doing so, main point, it is anti-European and especially anti-French.
I doubt very much whether the people who lived in, say, Saxony or Masuria in the year 1003 called themselves "Germans" or "Poles".
I also strongly doubt that a whole lot of people now living in Saxony or Masuria can trace their lineage back to "Poles" and "Germans" of the 11th century.
Lot of water under the bridge. The whole concept of "nations" as unified peoples with common ancestry is a relatively modern invention, and the coming and going of peoples throughout the ages means that most everyone in Europe (around Poland even more than around here) in fact has a smorgasbord of ethnic identities represented in their ancestry.
Good answers on the Euro and the French nation by the way, Ning. Looks like we got ourselves a new A2K member who makes a lot of sense ;-).
Walter
Sorry but you lost me. The question had nothing to do with France or any other specific European nation. It was about the Euro if the EU does not work out. .
Well, nimh, I don't know about these eprsons either. But I do know that the (minne-)singers about that time ( alittle bit later) were singing about 'German'.
The country was called 'Germania' by Tacitus:
Quote:
1) Germania omnis a Gallis Raetisque et Pannoniis Rheno et Danuvio fluminibus, a Sarmatis Dacisque mutuo metu aut montibus separatur: cetera Oceanus ambit, latos sinus et insularum inmensa spatia complectens, nuper cognitis quibusdam gentibus ac regibus, quos bellum aperuit. Rhenus, Raeticarum Alpium inaccesso ac praecipiti vertice ortus, modico flexu in occidentem versus septentrionali Oceano miscetur. Danuvius molli et clementer edito montis Abnobae iugo effusus pluris populos adit, donec in Ponticum mare sex meatibus erumpat: septimum os paludibus hauritur.
(P.Cornelii Taciti: DE ORIGINE ET SITU GERMANORUM) :wink:
BTW: the Saxons were 'christianised' at the end of 8th century (in 799 Pope Leo met Charlemagne in Paderborn) and they became part of 'Germany' at that time.)
Interesting expansions on the history of the development of European nationalities.
To answer c.i.'s question, I would say that the Euro is an "accepted currency" in the sense that its underlying value rests on the perception of the cohesiveness and viability of The European Union.
The currency "works" because there is a consensus that it is tied to "The Economy of The European Union". If in fact that viability and cohesiveness prove illusory, the Euro as a financial instrument will collapse, as there will be nothing of substance behind it.
Given that the founding and the follow-on partners of the EU have great stakes in the success of both the currency and the union, heroic efforts will be made to ensure the success of both. These efforts may succeed, transforming the Euro from an "accepted" currency" into an "established" currency, or they may not. Really, nothing of this sort has been accomplished since the days of the Roman Empire. Thgere are compelling social and economic arguments for The Euro and for The European Union, but there are longstanding and equally compelling political and ethnic differences which render the success of the concept problematic, not the least of which difficulties are the lack of either a common language or an integrated, shared culture and history.
It may surprise perhaps some of you that the EURO isn't that 'new' at all: it's - more or less - just the re-named ECU (= European Currency Unit, pronounced like the ancient French currency).
Quote:The Ecu was the first quasi-currency for Europe.
Together with the Exchange Rate Mechanism (ERM) it formed the European Monetary System which was established in 1979.
It was originally an accounting unit for the community's internal budget.
But later it became more like a real currency - for example it was used in travellers' cheques and bank deposits, though it was never issued as a note or coin.
As economic and monetary union developed, it formed the basis for the development of the Euro, the EU's single currency.
source: from the BBC [archived]
Quote:ecu: abbreviation of European currency unit.
A notional unit of exchange, conceived in 1979, based on a "basket," or weighted combination, of the currencies of nations that belonged to the European Community. The principal currencies involved were the German mark, the French franc, the British pound sterling, and the Italian lira. The ecu was created by the European Community with the aim of eventually making it the single currency of a unified western European economy. It was increasingly used in commercial banking transactions because its relative stability rendered it more suitable than a national currency for fixing contractual terms. It was especially important in the international bond market, where it had become the second most widely used currency (after the U.S. dollar) by the early 1990s. In 1999 the ecu was replaced by the euro.
source: britannica
timberlandko wrote:c.i., regardless what the World Economy does, without a firm, stable underlying, unified administrational structure, spanning both domestic and foreign policy, political as well as fiscal, the EU is a fiction, and that does not bode well for its currency. As has been mentioned before, the Euro is an accepted currency, not an established currency. Its continued acceptance rides entirely on the prospects of the EU.
Would have never strung those words together--but this is what I've been trying to say. I agree with Timber's assessment. Using the same currency can't be the EU's ultimate goal. Speaking with one, firm voice would have to be the underpinning to make the currency respectable...oh...what Timber said. :wink:
With my little bit of understanding of human culture, the language and social differences, it would seem a huge obsticle to overcome to unite the EU into one cohesive unit - never mind the political and economic differences. It will be interesting to watch - especially during the next few decades when it will make it or lose it. "Compromise" is not in most countries vocabulary - nay, in most individual's vocabulary.
Actually, the EU isn't thaught to be a "cohesive unit".
How do they reconcile the legal system into one?
