Category: News and Views
QUOTE
It is generally considered that Cornwall came under the dominion of the English Crown in the time of Athelstan's rule, i.e. 924-939, if the English crown
as such can be said to have actually existed at that time. In the absence of any specific documentation to record this event, supporters of Cornwall's
"English status" presume that it was made a part of England as a result. However, within a mere five years of Athelstan's death, King Edmund issued a charter,
in AD 944, styling himself "King of the English and ruler of this province of the Britons". Thus we can see that the "province" was a territorial possession,
which has long had a special relationship to the British Crown, and its preceding institutions. The word province has been interpreted as referring to
a church diocese rather than a political entity.
During the latter part of the pre-Norman period, the eastern seaboard of modern day England became increasingly under the sway of the Norse. Eventually
England became ruled by Norse monarchs, and the Anglo-Saxon kingdoms fell one by one, with Wessex being conquered in 1013 by King Sweyn Forkbeard. Notably,
while Sweyn's realms, which included Denmark and Norway in the north, and modern day English areas such as Mercia (an Anglian kingdom of the current Midlands),
much of which, along with northern England, fell under the "Danelaw". But while Sweyn ruled Wessex, along with his other realms, from 1013 onwards, followed
by his son Canute the Great, Cornwall was not part of his realm of Wessex. A map by the American historian called the "The Dominions of Canute" (pictured
just above) show that Cornwall, like Wales and Scotland, was neither part of Sweyn Forkbeard's nor Canute's Danish empire. Neither Sweyn Forkbeard nor
Canute properly conquered or controlled Scotland, Wales or Cornwall; these modern day Celtic nations were both "client nations" who had to pay a yearly
tribute or danegeld to both Sweyn and Canute, but, provided they did so, Scotland, Wales and Cornwall could keep their autonomy from the Danes. Ultimately,
the Danes control of Wessex was lost in 1042 with the death of both of Canute's sons (Edward the Confessor retook Wessex for the Saxons) but nevertheless
this important piece of history, that Cornwall was not part of the Danes empire is critical and shows that both the Saxons and the Danes had very little
political input into Cornwall during the pre-Norman conquest era.
When the Domesday Survey was initiated, by William, in 1086, men were sent to "each shire" in his new Kingdom. This has to be seen within the context of
matters of land, property and taxation and not as a means of misrepresenting what is understood, at that time, as a county. A shire, coming under the jurisdiction
of the sheriff, is known alternatively as sheriffdom, shrievalty, or vicecomitatus and equates to the modern meaning of the word county.
Whether it was held by the Crown or granted to family or favourites, the Earldom (or County) of Cornwall (Comitatus Cornubiǽ) included all territorial revenues,
rights and property which were held "as of the Honor". When held by the Crown, it was held not jure coronǽ but jure Comitatus - or jure Ducatus, when augmented
to a Duchy - as of the Honor in manu Regis existente, and did not merge into the Crown.
When Earl Edmund died, circa AD 1300, the Earldom of Cornwall passed to King Edward I - his next heir and cousin - and not as some helpless escheat. In
1337, Edward III augmented the Earldom to a Duchy. Commonly perceived to have been created by a charter dated the 17th of March 1337, although that charter
refers to something that has already taken place, it can be shown that there was an Act of Parliament at a date prior to the 16th March 1337. This Act
of Parliament is recited during the time that Henry V annexed substituted manors (see Rolls of Parliament 9 Henry V) to the Duchy following that King's
disannexing the Manor of Isleworth from the Duchy and re-granting to St Savior's Abbey two years previously.
“That at the Parliament held at Westminster the Monday next after the Feast of St. Matthias the Apostle in the 11th year of the reign of King Edw[ard] III.,
amongst other things it was agreed that the eldest sons of the Kings of England, scilicet those who should be next heirs to the Realm of England, should
be Dukes of Cornwall, and that the County of Cornwall should always remain as a Duchy to the eldest sons of the Kings of England, who should be next heirs
to the said Realm without being given elsewhere."
A following charter, of 17th March 1337, enumerated what comprised the Duchy of Cornwall. The principal items enumerated were the vicecomitatus and the
customary right to make and appoint the sheriff. This formally represented that entity which is today referred to as "the county" and conclusively shows
that this properly exists within the Duchy of Cornwall. Also indicative is the observation by John Norden within his "Topographical and Historical Survey
of Cornwall" (1650, a narrative addressed to the King), namely:
"Before Cornwall was made a Dukedome, and vnited vnder the Principallitye of Wales, which was in the time of kinge Edw[ard]. the 3..."
When the first Duke of Cornwall came of age in 1351, one of his first official acts was to carry out his own form of Domesday survey (Commission 25 Edward
III). This has already been referred to above and confirms that Cornwall was not in England, when the Duke refers to his tenants and property as being
in Cornwall and England. This implies Cornwall was at that time a distinct non-English territory, a province of the Britons, with people and rights. To
dismiss this as a relic of mediaeval feudalism, as stated above, may be construed as seriously misrepresenting the rights of Cornwall and its people to
be seen as one of the constituent British nations.
Many supporters will, in addition to making legal or constitutional arguments, stress that the Cornish are a distinct ethnic group or nation, that people
in Cornwall typically refer to 'England' as beginning east of the River Tamar, and that there is a Cornish language. If correct they argue the Cornish
therefore have a right to national self determination. Campaigners in 2001 for the first time prevailed upon the UK census to count Cornish ethnicity as
a write-in option on the national census, although there was no separate Cornish tick box. In 2004 school children in Cornwall could also record their
ethnicity as Cornish on the schools census. Additionally, the Council of Europe has been applying increasing pressure on the UK government to recognise
the Cornish for protection under the Council's
Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities.
In the world of Cornish sport also can be found expressions of Cornish national identity. In 2004 a campaign was started to field a Cornish national team
in the 2006 Commonwealth Games.
Some supporters of self-government argue that the de jure constitutional status of Cornwall is a Duchy and country and therefore not a county of England;
the Duchy of Cornwall and current UK government deny this claim. Supporters of self-government often point to a lack of co-operation shown by the Duchy
of Cornwall authorities when requests are made for an investigation of constitutional issues. In 1997 the Liberal Democrat Andrew George MP attempted to
raise a Duchy-related question; he was prevented by an injunction that disallows MPs raising any questions in Parliament that are in any way related to
the Duchy. At the time he was told it was a "restricted action"; to raise such a Duchy-related question might "cast reflections on the sovereign or the
royal family" and that there was a "similar injunction on speeches"[
In April 2006 the Cornish Stannary Parliament lodged a case with the European Court of Human Rights regarding the case for Cornwall, in respect of alleged
violations of the European Convention of Human Rights, Articles 6, (independent and impartial courts); 8, (respect family life); 10, (freedom of expression);
13, (violations by officials); 14 with Protocol 12,
(discrimination on the grounds of association with a national minority, property, birth or other status); 17, (the official destruction of rights); Protocol
1 Article 1, (property rights) with 385 supporting documents. The Court stated that it: "will deal with the case as soon as practicable".
Objectives of the Cornish Stannary Parliament's application to the European Court of Human Rights 2006 are:-
1. To request a ruling by the Court that the Convention rights of the Applicants are violated on the grounds of bias and discrimination in the legislative,
judicial and executive decision making process adopted by the government of the United Kingdom in relation to Cornwall on account of the priorities being
provided in terms of 'rights, property and profits' (Crown Proceedings Act 1947, Doc.37) in Cornwall for the Duke of Cornwall as Heir to the Throne causing
harassment, intimidation and deprivation to the Applicants as members of the indigenous Celtic people of Cornwall.
2. To request a ruling by the Court that the Duchy of Cornwall Estate, as the provider of an income for the Heir to the Throne, be designated a public body
as is the case with the Crown Estate which has no holdings
in Cornwall. (Doc.40+95).
3. To request a ruling by the Court that the protection of the Convention rights of the Applicants requires the government of the United Kingdom to apply
the principle of equality before the law (Doc.36) in the distribution of state funding so that the culture, heritage, traditions and language of
the indigenous Cornish national minority of Britain is funded proportionate to that currently made available for the culture, heritage, traditions and language
of the English national majority of Britain
as well as the Welsh, Gaels and Ulster Scots.
4. To request a ruling by the Court that the protection of the Convention rights of the Applicants requires enforceable adherence to the principle of equality
before the law in legislation relevant to land ownership, whether designated Crown land or otherwise, and the implementation of the measures necessary
to realise the discontinuance of exemptions from planning legislation and regulations (Doc.93) in order to eliminate the suspicion of the official use
of planning laws to maximise the profits of one state aided organisation, impose deprivation on, and suppress the Celtic identity and cultural heritage
of, the Applicants and other Cornish people.
5. To request a ruling by the Court that the exclusion of the Cornish from the provisions of the Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities
constitutes a violation of the Convention rights of the Applicants.
6.To request a ruling by the Court that the protection of the Convention rights of individuals in ‘association with a national minority’ requires the inclusion
of a guarantee of the international principle of equality before the law within the legal systems of applicant states and member states as a defining qualification
for membership of the Council of Europe.
Hey Loui,
Fascinating article! I love reading about history like that, people or social history that is. I don't of course profess to be an expert on social or political history, or about this particular topic but something like this always seems to be a bit of a double edged sword. I may be stating the obvious here but here's what I mean.
First of all, as far as making Cornwall a country, or keeping it as a county of England, that seems pretty straightforwrd to iron out. Ask the people. We live in a democratic society after all, so why not hold a vote on it.
Firstly though, give the people the facts. Being out on your own, it seems to me, can be somewhat dangerous. Take the example of Greenland. As it stands now this is under self government to a large extent, as far as it's own affairs are concerned, but the way I understand it is that Denmark handles it's international affairs. Denmark is also responsible for at least half of its (Greenland's), government revenues. Again I may be barking up the wrong tree here, but would total autonomy signify an end to Danish (or English in the case of Cornwall), financial assistance? I'd have to research that one.
It's also whetted my apetite for a bit of research into my own country, Wales. We have the national assembly (emphasize the ass), but again the way I understand it, we still have to answer to English rule.
Thanks for this. You seem to have given me at least something to do for a bit lol.
hugs,
Simon
I think most people misunderstand the Cornish Stannary parliaments wishes. they don't want total seperation from the UK, the conditions would be unlivable.
what they do wnat howeve, is protection for their culture, and more autonomy like scotland or northern ireland has.
given the overwhelming evidence in their favour, i fail to see how it sn't been granted already.
cornish culture is absoluely amazing, and i've now begun learning the cornish language.
something must be done to preserve this small vestage which is still left of this minority group befre it is too late.
however, it should be understood, the stannary parliament can legally overrule westminster on cornish issues.
Ah I see. Well I have to agree with you there. They do need to be recognized as a distinct ethnic group, as the article and you said, it's what they are, after all. I was just a bit concerned as to what that would mean for the Cornish people as a whole.
On the language, yeah, it's a great language, very similar to Welsh, being Celtic. I, like you, am also a great believer in preserving your heritage with regard to language, custom etc. I believe in it, but need to do more about it, as I speak neither Scots Gaelic nor Welsh very well, despite having aScottish father and Welsh mother. It has to be said though that neither of them spoke their languages either lol.
Hmm it seems then, with the Cornish stannary parliament being able to over rule west minster on matters of Cornish interest that it is close to the Greenlandic way of doing things also.
As I said, Interesting stuff.
I've just started learning, i'm realy enjoying it too, I finished my first lesson yesterday and am waiting on the marks.