Which part of scotland is more anglo

poonpoon · Which part of scotland is more anglo

I was just having an argument with my mum about what part of scotland had more anglo, Glasgow area or Aberdeen area, what do you think?
Cheers.

October1974

and what is the basis of this arguement?

sgmillerton

i would have said ayrshire or the borders.

Maol.Chaluim

I wouldn't.

sgmillerton

you are probably right.

Aventinian

I suppose we're looking for places for Dave Coull to avoid, or at least discount the opinions of.

Tomorrow: what is the most Anglified public school in Scotland? Has Fettes won the Coull Cup for another year?

Jimbo

Possibly Embra.

will live from Glasgow

i find it quite reassuring that you cant tell which part of scotland is more anglicised,its almost as if theres not actually any noticeable difference between the english and the scottish.....

Aventinian

poonpoon

LOL, 8 replies and not one answer, damn.
We just wondered, what parts would have the most anglo-saxon as oppossed to celt or viking etc, Aberdeen or Glagow area. Both are almost completely celt IMO, I remember when I was young at school, in Glasgow all the names used to be MC's or Macs, or reid, only a couple wern't Scottish and they were Indian or something, LOL. Which is surprising since nowadays people in both countries are pretty similar.

Anthropos

Well in answer to your question 'is it Glasgow or Aberdeen', I don't know for definite but I would think it was Aberdeen due to the oil industry attracting a lot of non Scots to that area.

There was actually a survey conducted about the number of English born people in Scotland, I am quoting from memory, but I think Argyll had the highest number at 12% and Lanarkshire the lowest with 4.5%.

However a confirmed figure comes from the 2001 Census which gives the number as 408,948 which is 8.1% of the population.

William_Cleland

East Lothian and Berwickshire I would have though which had Anglo-Saxon settlement going back to the 6th century giving rise to placenames like Oldhamstocks. England doesn't have an exclusive claim to the legacy of that. It is as native to Scotland as Gaelic.

http://getamap.ordnancesurvey.co....Name=g&gazString=NT7424970550

RadgeJougal

Marchmont in Edinburgh. Applecross.

carol

we stayed at Lochcarron a few years back, not very Scottish, stunning scenery through the Bealach-na-ba to Applecross though, Plockton again not so Scottish, hielan coos were Wink

regards

Carol

agentmancuso

Economist

I thought the OP was asking in a slightly disparaging way, which areas of Scotland have most English born people living there - in which case I'd say Edinburgh (most definitely!) Perthshire and parts of the Highlands.

carol

relatively untouched where i am in Perthshire, although my partner is English

Carol

Maol.Chaluim

Maol.Chaluim

William_Cleland

Think you are selecting facts to fit your desired answer rather than using the facts to determine what happened.

carol

MC the link is the from the Scottish Place Name Society

Although I'm completely clueless when it comes to placenames, I did oversee/coordinate the Clackmannanshire project, http://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/institutes/sassi/spns/CtClack.htm the group was tutored/led by Dr Simon Taylor who is a toponymist? (place name specialist) and does some of the society's research etc, excellent speaker and worth going to see.

some of Simon's recent work
http://www.gla.ac.uk/departments/celtic/place-names/placenameshome.htm

I think we're off track a bit Rolling Eyes

regards

Carol

William_Cleland

carol

you know the area?

it's said that Fishcross may of got it's name from when the fish wifies sold their wares, Alloa harbour would've been less than 3 miles away. Not of Gaelic origin.

pics of the harbour
http://www.dgnscrn.demon.co.uk/genuki/CLK/Alloa/Alloaboats.jpg
http://www.dgnscrn.demon.co.uk/genuki/CLK/Alloa/Alloaharbour1.jpg
http://www.dgnscrn.demon.co.uk/genuki/CLK/Alloa/Alloaharbour2.jpg

William_Cleland

Played fitba there a few times at the park behind the Miners Welfare many moons ago. Thought the name was to do with an old gospel hall that used the early Christian symbolism of the fish but I forget who told me that.

carol

miners welfare no longer, it's now a pub/lounge bar, used to go to the dancing there many moons ago. I've my daughter's 21st there tomorrow night, and my partner's doing a gig there on Sat.

The area where you would've played footie I think is now being built on, which I find a bit strange as the land is supposedly full of old minings.

Fishcross has literally merged into Sauchie with all the housebuilding etc

I've never heard of the Gospel Hall origin before

regards

Carol

Babygael

well, while I am Scots born, I was raised else where.... meaning?
I have not become affected by the..... erm Anglo affliction and therefore cannot understand it at all!! Shocked

Maol.Chaluim

agentmancuso

Aventinian

Anthropos

William_Cleland

Maol.Chaluim

agentmancuso

inga · Re: Which part of scotland is more anglo

Dave Coull

Poonpoon was having an argument with her mum about which parts of Scotland are more "anglo".

In my opinion, every region, area, county, city, and town of Scotland is Scottish.

Aventinian wrote "I suppose we're looking for places for Dave Coull to avoid, or at least discount the opinions of".

There are no parts of Scotland which I avoid. There are no parts of Scotland whose opinions should be discounted.

Before the referendum on setting up a Scottish Parliament, there were widespread predictions of whole regions voting against. No such thing happened. Every part of Scotland voted in favour. I am confident that it will be the same with independence. The opinions of those who are against will be counted, and they will be a minority.

Aventinian also wrote "what is the most Anglified public school in Scotland?", and mentioned Fettes as a contender.

I don't know the answer to that one. What I do know is that the pupils, and masters, and former pupils, etc, of Fettes and other such places are in a minority. So, even if they should vote solidly against independence (and, by the way, I don't think they will) the region of which Fettes is a very small part will vote in favour of independence.

And, of course, if anybody thinks I'm wrong about that, there is really only one way to prove this one way or the other.

REFERENDUM NOW - INDEPENDENCE - YES OR NO.

Aventinian

Dave Coull

Aventinian wrote "I suppose we're looking for places for Dave Coull to avoid, or at least discount the opinions of".

I replied "There are no parts of Scotland which I avoid. There are no parts of Scotland whose opinions should be discounted."

Aventinian now comes back with "Anything within spitting distance of the River Almond would seem to be fair game for that, given your previous comments".

I suspect you have a rather rosy view of this river and of the places along its banks. Although there have been efforts at a clean-up in recent years, the River Almond was for a long time one of the most industrially polluted rivers in Scotland, because of the bleaching of flax in the 18th Century, and oil shale and coal mining in the 19th and 20th centuries.

As it just so happens, I read a newspaper article yesterday which contrasted opinion in Blackburn, West Lothian, with opinion in Blackburn, Lancashire. My impression is that a majority in Blackburn (West Lothian) will vote for independence. Blackburn (West Lothian) is on the River Almond.

Also, as it just so happens, my daughter and my grandchildren live not far from the River Almond. I have a couple of times gone for walks with my daughter and my grandchildren down to Cramond harbour, at the mouth of the river. Like I said, there are no parts of Scotland which I avoid, and certainly not the area where my daughter and my grandchildren live. Like everybody else in that area, my daughter and my son-in-law will each have one vote in a referendum. My daughter (born and raised in England, speaks with an English accent, voted for the Green Party in May) has told me she will vote for independence. I really don't know which way her Scottish-born husband will vote.

However, I repeat: before the referendum on setting up a Scottish Parliament, there were widespread predictions of whole regions voting against. No such thing happened. Every part of Scotland voted in favour. I am confident that it will be the same with independence. The opinions of those who are against will be counted, and they will be a minority.

So far as posh schools are concerned, the pupils, and masters, and former pupils, etc, of Fettes and other such places, are a small minority even in the areas where they are located. So, even if they should vote solidly against independence (and, by the way, I am confident that they won't) the region of which Fettes is a very small part will vote in favour of independence.

And, of course, if anybody thinks I'm wrong about that, there is really only one way to prove this one way or the other.

REFERENDUM NOW - INDEPENDENCE - YES OR NO.

mairead

Och well, by the time TRUMPTON is built by Donald, their will be many more Angles around that part.

agentmancuso

agentmancuso

Dave Coull

Agentmancuso asks "What about the parts where rich people live?"

I once saw a sociological survey of the Westminster parliamentary constituencies of the UK. Surprisingly, the richest one of all, according to that survey, wasn't in Surrey, it was Bearsden and Milngavie. But the important point to note is that in every parliamentary constituency there were poor people and there were rich people. Even in Surrey, somebody sweeps the streets, somebody collects the rubbish, somebody delivers the mail, etc etc etc, and no, they don't travel there from a long way away, on the wages they get they couldn't afford to do that, the people who sweep the streets, collect the rubbish, deliver the mail, etc etc, in Surrey, are people who live in Surrey. Some constituencies have more rich people than others, some constituencies have more poor people than others, but the idea that there is such a thing as a constituency where only rich people live, or where only poor people live, is a complete myth. Class differences exist throughout the UK. They exist within every region, every city, every town, every area, every constituency, of the UK.

"Or English people?" There are some constituencies in Scotland with more English people than others, but the idea that there is such a thing as a Scottish constituency where only English people live is a complete myth.

"Or privately-educated people?" - There are some constituencies in Scotland with more privately-educated people than others, but the idea that there is such a thing as a Scottish constituency where only privately-educated people live is a complete myth.

"Or most cryptically of all 'anglicised Scots'?" - see above.

I repeat: before the referendum on setting up a Scottish Parliament, there were widespread predictions of whole regions voting against. No such thing happened. Every part of Scotland voted in favour. I am confident that it will be the same with independence. The opinions of those who are against will be counted, and they will be a minority.

And, of course, if anybody thinks I'm wrong about that, there is really only one way to prove this one way or the other.

REFERENDUM NOW - INDEPENDENCE - YES OR NO.

mairead

Agent,
Definately something more Xenophobic.

agentmancuso

agentmancuso

mairead

Bet you have Agent, and your Morris bells make a racket too. Very Happy

agentmancuso

We should do a duet sometime...

RadgeJougal

Dave Coull

I wrote "the idea that there is such a thing as a constituency where only rich people live, or where only poor people live, is a complete myth".

and Radge Jougal ciomes back with

"Dave Coull's got it totally wrong"

I suggest you think about what you have just written, Radge Jougal. The word "totally" suggests that you are saying not just sixty percent wrong, or seventy percent wrong, or eighty percent wrong, or ninety percent wrong, but one hundred percent wrong. Like anybody else I can sometimes get things wrong. But what you are claiming is that, in this particular case, I am "totally" wrong.

"Dave Coull's got it totally wrong again"

"Again" ?

I'm not aware that you, the awfully shy person who hides behind the pseudonym Radge Jougal, have ever been able to prove me "totally wrong" about anything.

In this particular case, I said that there is no such thing as a constituency "where ONLY rich people live". You said "There are constituencies which are ALMOST entirely populated by rich people". I suggest you read these two statements, the one from me and the one from you, again, a bit more carefully, this time. It may then begin to dawn on you that the two statements are not contradictory. Until such time as you can prove that there is such a thing as a particular constituency where every single person on the electoral register voter is rich, a constituency which consists ENTIRELY (not "almost" entirely) of rich people, your claim that I am "totally" wrong is without foundation.

RadgeJougal

I did read it, Dave, and it's still rubbish. Even when you do your stuff from the pulpit.

The people who clean the streets can travel to work.

In actual fact, it's just as likely that every constituency has middle class people in it doing middle class jobs - teachers, doctors, church(wo)men, councillors/politicians, shop keepers, managers, librarians etc. Although they can travel in too...

Although, like a true pseudo-intellectual, you've assumed we've all agreed on the definition of rich. Riches are relative, and can be defined in several different ways. One (wo)man's riches are another's poverty.

"awfully shy person who hides behind the pseudonym Radge Jougal"

I'm surprised you haven't translated it this time. Do you think folk will think it's my real name?

Dave Coull

I suggested to Radge Jougal that he should re-read what he had written and think about it. Unfortunately, logical thought is a painful and unfamiliar process for Radge.

He responds "I did read it, Dave, and it's still rubbish".

You are saying that your own remarks are rubbish?

Or perhaps you were responding to my suggestion that you re-read two statements, yours and mine? I pointed out, as a matter of simple logic in the use of language, that, there was in fact no contradiction between, on the one hand, saying that there no constituencies where "only rich people live", and, on the other hand, saying there are some constituences "almost entirely populated by rich people". Are you now saying that you have re-read these two statements, yours and mine, you have realised that there is in fact no contradiction between them, and you are now saying that both statements are rubbish?

If that isn't what you are saying, then, not for the first time, your remarks are about as clear as mud.

RadgeJougal

Will you quit sermonising for once? You can't even admit you're wrong - I doubt you ever have.

A constituency could - in theory - be populated by rich people - but since you haven't actually defined what "rich" means, no one can answer that question.

Holebender

A constituency full of rich people and no gardeners or cleaners? Hardly bears thinking about!

Dave Coull

Radge Jougal wrote "Will you quit sermonising for once?"

No.

Of course not.

Why on earth should I ?

I can be quite careful about how I write my posts. I can be quite careful about how I express things. If you find that irritating, if you find my style of writing "like a sermon", well, tough. Get used to it.

"you haven't actually defined what 'rich' means" AND NEITHER HAVE YOU.

It is up to you whether you choose to do so or not. As for me, the subject of this topic, raised by "poonpoon", is "Which part of Scotland is more anglo?" I hadn't intended to get involved in this topic in the first place, and only did so because Aventinian mentioned my name and attributed to me attitudes which I do not in fact hold. Having got dragged into it to that extent, I have no intention of getting dragged way off the original point by you.

"You can't even admit you're wrong" - I can and do admit when I am wrong. For instance, almost exactly twenty nine years ago today, in late November 1978, I published a public admission that I had been wrong about something. And, of course, there have also been other, more recent, occasions than that when I admitted I was wrong about things. However, I only admit I was wrong when I was wrong! You, Radge Jougal, have never been able to prove me wrong about ANYTHING. In this particular case, you claimed I was TOTALLY wrong, yet your own version of things differed only slightly from mine. I said there are no constituencies where "only rich people live", you said there are some constituences "almost entirely populated by rich people". Since there is no contradiction between your statement and mine, your claim that I was "totally" wrong is just plain daft.

RadgeJougal

RadgeJougal

Since you were first to bring it up - define rich for us.

"Why on earth should I ? "

Because it bores everyone, including people you think are your mates, stupid.

"You, Radge Jougal, have never been able to prove me wrong about ANYTHING."

Since you speak ex cathedra, you presumably have papal infallibility too.

Dave Coull

Radge Jougal wrote "Will you quit sermonising for once?"

and I replied "No. Of course not. Why on earth should I ? "

Radge now comes back with "Because it bores everyone"

Okay, so "everyone" will just have to be bored........
My writing style is what it is, and won't be changing.

Aventinian

I don't think it's just your writing style he objects to.

agentmancuso

Holebender

Ex cathedra mean from the chair and, as I understand it, the Roman Catholic Church uses the term to mean specifically from the chair of Peter, the first Bishop of Rome, so only the occupant of Peter's chair can speak ex cathedra.

agentmancuso

Aventinian

While all bishops certainly sit on a cathedra, I believe only one can be said to speak ex cathedra.

The Catholic Encyclopedia appears to agree with me on this front: http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/05677a.htm, citing a ruling of the Vatican Council speaking solely of the Roman Pontiff.

Holebender

Exactly. The term could obviously apply to any chairman but the RC Church specifically uses the term to mean from the chair of Peter.

agentmancuso

I get the impression that since the declaration of papal infallibility in 1870 usage has been restricted in practice to the bishop of Rome. But as I reject out of hand the very notion of papal infallibility, this doesn't apply to me. I'm sure the Orthodox would agree too. joker

(couldn't find an emoticon wearing a mitre. Not much in demand I suppose...)

RadgeJougal

Blackleaf

This makes me laugh.

The Scots asking "What is the most Anglo area of Scotland?" and saying "Anglo" instead of "English".

And all this would be like the English saying "What is the most Scottish area of England?", which you never hear, or the most Welsh.

It's just daft. You Scots are humourless, hairy, violent, drunk and a bit daft.

Holebender

Those are compliments coming from you.

Why do you bother?

Blackleaf

It's just pointless, in my opinion. The Scots are obsessed with the English. England borders two countries and Scotland borders only one, but you never hear the English saying "Which part of England is the most Scotto'd or Welshed?". We just don't care. If people in Northumbria and Cumbria speak with Scottish accents, then what does it matter? If there are Welsh-speaking English people in Herefordshire, Gloucestershire and Shropshire (and there are 330,000 English Welsh-speakers in that area) then what does it matter? They are still English.

Though the Scots have a chip on the shoulder about their neighbours which is something the English don't have.

macnumpty

So why are you on here all the time, Blackleaf?

RadgeJougal

Maol.Chaluim

Not to mention those "subsidised" Scots...

Niqaryt

The SG collects data on the nationality of mothers who give birth in Scotland - so for example, mothers who have English nationality (which could be a proxy for 'Englishness' or anglo maybe?) - although as the child is born in Scotland, it then becomes an argument about whether being born in Scotland makes someone Scottish, or whether having Scottish parents makes one Scottish etc.

Moray has the highest proportion of children born to English mothers, because it has a large military presence. After that you have the Borders (unsuprisingly its the closest place in Scotland to England!) and then Edinburgh and Aberdeen.

Which part of scotland is more anglo

Re: Which part of scotland is more anglo