Did English start off as a creole language?

"Further incursions into Britain of a succession of other invaders over the centuries, ending with the Normans in 1066, a very famous date in English history - not least of which it marks the very last time a foreign power has invaded these islands"
======

Wasn't the last foreign invader William III?

<<The Romans changed all that by building really effective roads and all their famous fortifications and other edifices and aset the foundations of a civilsed society, and at the same time had a very well organised military. >>

WHAT!? --"CHeers"??

Damian, it's an incidental benefit we derive.
Do you think the Romans built all that for our good? To benefit our forefathers? In no way. They did it selfishly, for themselves so that they could indulge on their vain capitalistic conquer-glory and ship our fathers around Britain as slaves to be traded and used for sport.

And very well that their tyranical empire fell. We do enjoy the roads they built us. A passage fits this nicely:

'I gave you a land on which you had not labored, and cities which you had not built, and you have lived in them; you are eating of vineyards and olive groves which you did not plant.'

ahhhh, sweet justice

***Wasn't the last foreign invader William III?***

Yes, he came storming in across the North Sea from the Netherlands accompanied by an armada of ships all firing cannoballs and Dutch cheeses at the golden beaches of England, broke through all the coastal defences and then he and his henchmen laid waste to the English countryside, raping and pillaging all his way to London which he decimated in the space of an afternoon while everyone was on their teabreak!

Don't be silly - William of Orange, although born in Den Haag (The Hague to you), his mother was Mary, the eldest daughter of the unfortunate King Charles I of England, so he was the legitimate successor to James II as King of England - and Ireland, as it happened.

The last MILITARY invasion of the British Isles was that of the Normans, under William I, aka William the Conqueror, following the Norman victory at the Battle of Hastings in 1066. The site of the Battle is close to the village of Battle itself, appropriately enough, and is a tourist attraction in itself. It's actually quite a pleasant expanse of green meadowland complete with waving buttercups and cowslips.....

Subsequent attempts by other, more recent, warfaring dictatorial maniacs to invade this precious stone set in a silver sea all failed miserably......Napolean and Hitler come to mind here.

'Guest' : « There is a theory that spoken English developed as a sort of Anglo-Saxon creole and that it emerged in writing after the Normans had removed the Anglo-Saxon aristocracy after 1066. »

Non, le vieil-anglais s'écrivait bien avant l'arrivée des francophones. En revanche le développement du moyen-anglais écrit avec graphie francisante est bien entendu postérieur à 1066.

Ignoring your sarcasm, a foreign power, landing with over 10,000 men (and cavalry) to take power from the current King sounds like an invasion to me - regardless of how much fighting he had to do, or any claim he had to the throne.

<<The last MILITARY invasion of the British Isles was that of the Normans, under William I, aka William the Conqueror, following the Norman victory at the Battle of Hastings in 1066. The site of the Battle is close to the village of Battle itself, appropriately enough, and is a tourist attraction in itself. It's actually quite a pleasant expanse of green meadowland complete with waving buttercups and cowslips.....
>>

The attitude of the Battle of Hastings, as seen from a "victorious" point of view, is a hand-me-down from the Norman kings and their following.

It's a romantic, glorified event now in the English mind-set, whereas it should be seen for what it truly was--the end of English freedom, the destruction of English dynasty, and the seeds of corruption for our language to which we are still suffering today.

<<It's a romantic, glorified event now in the English mind-set, whereas it should be seen for what it truly was >>

Though everyone who knew the truth and saw it for what it was was summarily dealt with with the loss of their own head. That's where the truth ended...sad

"It's a romantic, glorified event now in the English mind-set, whereas it should be seen for what it truly was--the end of English freedom, the destruction of English dynasty, and the seeds of corruption for our language to which we are still suffering today. "

Yeah, that Bill the conqueror was quite a dastardly fellow.

Alright, Matt, have it your own way......interpret the word "invasion" as you wish and let us have done with it! As a Scot, it doesn't really concern me much either way as we Scots didn't really become totally involved until the 1707 Act of Union with England and Wales anyway, by which time that huge tub of lard Queen Anne was on the throne of all our three home nations.