If the Franks were Germanics, does that mean that modern French and Germans are related?
they are brothers in denial
I think there latinized to a point were the Germanic element of their language and culture is gone.
>>379091
>gauls
>germanic tribes
the same
Every human is related. It just at matter of degrees.
>>379159
werent the gauls celts?
>>379091
The kingdom continued to be The Kingdom of the Franks, or Francia (literally France) but eventually they abandoned their germanic ways. The general population never adopted them to begin with.
>>379177
Yes, he is full of shit.
>>379175
This. Pretty much all of Europe is related, which is turn is related to all of Europe and Middle-East/Northern Africa, etc.
>>379183
So the Gauls got cleared out by the Romans, then Germanics filled the vacuum?
I do wonder what population looked like at the establishment of the Frankish Empire.
The areas around Flanders and the Picardie were the core region off the Salian Franks, right? Brittany had been resettled by Dumnonians. The Septimania in particular was a sort of Post-Roman society (the Franks called them straight-up Romans in documents), Burgundy was ruled by a Germanic tribal elite and Gascony as well as the southern parts of Aquitania might have been inhabited by people related to the Basques.
Who lived in Neustria and the northern parts of Aquitania? Romanized Gauls like in the kingdom of Soissons?
>>379153
>language
yes
>culture
no
>>379201
No, I'm a bit tired and the other commentary missing your sarcasm made me miss it too first.
In my defense, it wouldn't be the dumbest thing I've seen here.
A lot of French names are Germanic in origin, for what it's worth.
Charles, Gaston, Henri, Louis, Gui, etc.
>>379233
Pretty much all those and more are present in Spain and Italy though.
>>379201
Gauls became Romanised and Latinised, Franks (Germanics) moved over and came to rule over Gauls.
Over time, Franks became Latinised in West Francia which eventually became France
Yeah, but in the end regional identity will overrule origin like that.
I was under the impression that German(ic) influence is why French sounds less "hippidy bippidy dippidy" than the other Latin languages.
>>379603
>Hippidy bippidy dippidy
Kek, what the hell does that mean?
>>379201
No? Gauls were always Celtic, the closet modern day kin in Europe linguistically speaking to Gaelic speakers in Ireland, Welsh, and Northern Scotland are the French. The Romans conquered and subdued all of modern-day France/Gaul under Caesar. The Romans turned it into a massive colony of settlements, military bases, forts, and Romanized/Latinized the Gauls.
Just as they did in Hispania (Spain/Portugal). Roman Gaul and Hispania were their most important colonies in terms of actually increasing the Roman population. They never genocided or mass settled the Gauls elsewhere.
So tl;dr version:
Rome conquerors Gaul
Gauls get Romanized
WRE falls; Romanized Gauls are conquered by Franks who are to the French the way the Anglo-Saxons are to the English
The Germanic tongues the Franks spoke never passed on to the Romanized Gaulic people and they were assimilated in turn.
>>380025
Also a decent chunk of the "Franks" were Romanized Gaulic people who just decided they were Franks when it was politically convenient.
>>380029
Yep right on the money. In fact I think the Franks themselves left a smaller genetic influence on the modern French then the Saxons did with the English.
>WE WAZ VANDALS N SHIT
>>379265
They got them from France
Point stands
>>379091
The French are a fucking celtic nation that has forgotten it was celtic.
And the English are still celtic too, the Anglo-Saxons didn't wipe the goddamn race out. They assimilated in.
This is the part where I say Celts ruled the world and make statements about how this means Wales is the next superpower.
>>380645
Interestingly a good number of the early Saxon kings (some legendary) in England have decidedly Brythonic names, which would suggest that they were not simply invading Germanic warlords.
By the same token I don't think we can assume that the Celts wholesale replaced the native (possibly Iberian) population of pre-Celtic Britain. It seems more likely that Celtic Britain developed much the same way as Anglo-Saxon England did; cultural accretion and some degree of immigration.
>>379153
Their culture is still rather germanic
That map is misleading because it looks like a gradual expansion, when all of Gaul was conquered within a generation of Francia being founded, and the rest was only conquered three centuries later by Charlemagne.
Francia was an increasingly stable realm back when it almost exactly covered Gaul, and only included small territories lying beyond the Rhine (Allemania and Swabia, which even then were the most unruly and likely to rebel). But when Charlemagne conquered all this new land, it didn't work out so well at all. The cultural differences between Germans and Franks (ex-Gallo-Romans) were too great, not just linguistically but also in the way they thought of government or rights. It broke apart rather fast, and there's probably no way it could have remained in one peace for long.
>>379091
the first estate was latin
the second estate was germanic
the third estate was gallic
let it sit in the oven for a thousand years and you get France
Who here has been to France, a lot?
I have. The ethnic divide is quite noticable. Northern France look like Germans or Brits, brown hair, light eyes, brown eyebrows, rough complextions.
Go south and they get the tinted pale skin, dark eyebrows and dark greasy hair, and start to look like Italians and Spanish.
Paris is of course a mixture.
>>379265
>Pretty much all those and more are present in Spain and Italy though.
You mean those countries which got invaded and ruled by Germans for centuries?
>>381022
Most of France is neither of those, this is only true for border regions.
>>379201
>So the Gauls got cleared out by the Romans, then Germanics filled the vacuum?
Nobody ever gets cleared out, not unless it's total genocide which basically didn't happen much before the 20th century.
Usually a new population will move in, they will be a minority, however they have probably moved in by conquest or maybe diplomacy, so they always become the new ruling class. When the minority is the ruling class, the majority of the population seek to become like the minority rulers. But eventually the minority become merged genetically but their culture remains dominant after.
If a group moves in, and they are not culturally dominant, they will simply be absorbed over time. In the case of Europe right now, amount of migrants coming is insignificant to the European population, and they certainly do not have the dominant culture of Europe at all, and they will be assimilated in a few generations. The majority of immigrants that came to Britain in the 50s are now fully assimilated.
>>381024
The Romans invaded and ruled Germany and Gaul for centuries, well before the Germans did...
>>381026
Elsaß-Lothringen is german clay
>>381026
Maybe. I've spent a lot of time in North France and a lot in Southern France. I've just driven through the middle a few times.
>>380025
>WRE falls; Romanized Gauls are conquered by Franks who are to the French the way the Anglo-Saxons are to the English
this
>>381022
yes and this two populations brings none advantage politically
>>381024
No, by Germanics tribes.
>>379091
Yes. :3
>>379091
Occitania stronk
No Germans here I - I swear
>>379203
Neustria was inhabited by less-Romanised Gallic peoples, same with the northern parts of Aquitania. Rutilius Namatianus and some other sources hint at their more barbarous nature as than the Gauls of the south and east earlier on and talks of the constant revolts near the Loire and north and east of it. They were probably still heavily Romanised, but were less invested in the civitates system than the other Gauls.
>>381022
France is not the USA, it's a patchwork of different people. Gascons are not Normands and Bretons are not Corsicans. Until less than 100 years ago, you still had profound dissentions like the people of Beauce hating the Bourgeonnais for no reason and French is spoken by all French only since the 19th century, maybe less for Bretagne.
>>381169
Here we call the anglosphere the anglo-saxon world. It's correct to say that Australia, Canada, etc. and of course England are Anglo-Saxon (culturally and linguistically).
>>382710
Is that a question?
Compare the cultural distance between Australia and England and the one between Australia and China.
Isn't the answer obvious?
>>382727
It was an input. To show that there's literally nothing wrong with refering to what is french as frankish and vice versa.
>>379091
Franks are Germans forced to learn/become latinised during Roman rule. Germans are Germans that weren't latinised because they weren't occupied by Romans.
>>382775
What kind of nonsense is that?
>>382744
Franks were German invaders of the Gauls and founders of the Frank Kingdom that latter became France, but French are ethnically mostly Celts and culturally a mix of Gaulish Latin and German cultures.
Frank were too few in number in the Gauls and eventually dissolved in the genetic pool of the Gaulish that became modern French.
Your point is moot because Brits colonized the new world by going in it and fighting the locals when they were not happy and the French sometime melted with them and asked them to call themselves French so the borders of France would be virtually larger.
>>379690
It's an approximation of how Italian and Spanish sound to an Anglophone.
>>383063
Not him but hippy bippidy dippidy is literally how (british) english sounds.
A simple explanation:
Franks came from Belgium.
Eventually, they expanded. They had Neustria, that is Northern France and Austrasia, that is Western Germany.
Charlemagne then conquered Italy, Aquitaine and Eastern Germany. And that was the Frankish realm.
Eventually, it separated into different Kingdoms. There was Lotharingia, France, Germany and so on.
So, yes, France and Germany were once the same.
>>379091
Better off to regard the Rhineland, both those on its right and left flanks for a large number of kilometers as brothers.
Eastern Germans and Schleswigers/Holsteiners are different. Same with Saxons.
