[YG Conlang Archives] > [romconlang group] > messages [Date Index] [Thread Index] >
--- In romconlang@yahoogroups.com, "B. Garcia" <madyaas@g...> wrote: > On Wed, 23 Feb 2005 22:16:58 -0000, gregbontrager <GregBont@e...> wrote: > > > > > > I think I found a true Anglo-Romance conlang, or at least the > > closest thing to it! Check out Brithenig at > > http://hobbit.griffler.co.nz/introduction.html. An editorial at > > LangMaker.com had this to say about it: > > Oh my, you must be new :). > > Many of us are well acquainted with Brithenig. But, it's not really > close to Anglo-Romance. It's more like Celto-Romance. I'm not sure how one would go about justifying Anglo-Romance. The Anglo-Saxon invaders wanted the good stuff inside the Empire. I can think of a way of expanding the empire to the Elbe during Augustan times and thence into Jutland, but if the Angles, Saxons, and Jutes had been within the empire, then they would not have moved to a territory hounded by barbarians without the empire. One possibility that might work is that the Angles, Saxons, and Jutes were invited in as Imperial Allies of the British and successfully defended the island. But if a westward movement of barbarians were the threat against which Rome had to protect, it would make more sense to leave the Saxons along the North Sea as a defensive frontier. An extension of the frontier of Empire into Jutland would draw a defensive frontier along Jutland and one of the central German rivers, leaving Britain safe from invasion, - an interesting nexus for history, but one that does not meet the desired goal here. Another stumbling block is that the history of Old English is exceedingly complicated - this, of course, will not deter the determined conlanger. Be not discouraged, young worthy. A "plausible" setup may merely take longer than anticipated to produce.