Why on Earth would I want to join in a navel-gazing excercise among a bunch of Cornish extremists, in which Fulup and his cronies fall back on the old conspiracy theory that a document, predating the first Duchy of Cornwall Charter, mysteriously went missing, but that it is known to have stated that the whole of Cornwall came under the Duchy, and that the Duchy was a nation separate from England. Does anyone else find it very strange that, when the Duchy Charters themselves appear shortly afterwards (in 1337), they seem to totally contradict the supposed wording of this (vanished) document? Fulup insists that where the word county appears in the Charters with reference to Cornwall, it doesnt actually mean county at all, but is a mistranslation of comitas, but when it refers to any other county, it does actually mean county. So what exactly does the word counties mean when it is used in the phrase in the counties of Cornwall and Devon? Are we expected to believe that it means comitas in the case of Cornwall but means county in the case of Devon?
If the reader is beginning to think that this is stretching credulity to its limit, then I can assure him/her that there is better to come. Much of the first Charter consists of lists of lands and estates, which are defined as constituting the Duchy. It lists lands in the counties of: Wiltshire, Dorset, Devon, Somerset, Oxfordshire, Hertfordshire, Northamptonshire, Buckinghamshire, Surrey, Yorkshire and Middlesex. Surprisingly (as Fulub insists that the whole of Cornwall is Duchy land) it also lists the Duchy lands in Cornwall itself. Now if the whole of Cornwall is Duchy land, why would the Charter list the Duchy lands in Cornwall and not just state that the whole of Cornwall is Duchy land. Intriguingly, the listed lands in Cornwall amount to only a small fraction of the land area of the County of Cornwall, and are in total far smaller in area than the Duchy lands in Devon, which on their own amount to over half of the total Duchy lands. Many of you may be surprised to discover that even the Oval Cricket Ground in London is Duchy land.
Curiouser and curiouser you may think (with acknowledgements to Lewis Carroll), but surely Fulup could not be wrong about Cornwall being separate from England. Surely the Charters would state somewhere that Cornwall was separate from the Kingdom of England, wouldnt they. Well actually no they dont, and they actually state on a number of occasions that Cornwall is in the kingdom of England, on each occasion using the phrase:-
to succeed as Dukes of the same place, in the said kingdom of England
This can only mean one thing, i.e. that Cornwall is indeed in the kingdom of England. Maybe Fulup will rush in to inform us that kingdom of England is yet another unfortunate instance of a mistranslation. I wait with baited breath to hear Fulups explanation.
If anybody is interested in the history and definition of the Duchy of Cornwall, they will find the official version (as opposed to Fulups conspiracy theory) in the Summary on page 3 of the following document:-
Fulup asks Why did the 1998 Tamar Bridge act confirm the power of the Duke and border of Cornwall (the Duchy) if the Duchy of Cornwall is just a landed estate?
To answer this, I would refer to Statutory Instrument 1992 No. 2902:-
The clauses of interest are those relating to 'Persons to be served with notice of intended application' and 'Persons to receive copy of application and documents'. In both cases, the recipients concerning 'works on the foreshore and riverbeds' in both Devon and Cornwall include The Duchy of Cornwall. In the explanatory notes, the required recipients are defined as 'bodies having statutory responsibilities in the particular areas of the prospective applicant's intention to make an application'.
The wording of this Statutory Instrument makes it abundantly obvious why the power of the Duchy comes into play with regard to the 1998 Tamar Bridge Act, and it has nothing whatsoever to do with the Duchy of Cornwall being the whole county. The 1998 Act was passed to enable extension work to be carried out on the Tamar Bridge, which links Devon and Cornwall over the River Tamar. As the foundations of the main towers of the suspension bridge are built into the riverbed of the Tamar, and all works on the foreshore and riverbeds in Devon and Cornwall, come under the statutory responsibility of the Duchy of Cornwall (as per the Statutory Instrument), it is not in the least bit surprising that the 1998 Act contained the aforementioned clause, to satisfy the legal requirements of the Statutory Instrument. It certainly does not mean that the Duchy is the whole of the County of Cornwall, because if it does, it also means that the Duchy includes the whole of the county of Devon as well.
Again I leave it to others posting on this thread to judge for themselves.
Well in think that the contributor uses such language and fails to debate speaks volumes. You will note the insults and childish language are used to call me an "extremist".
The Royal Duchy of Cornwall did evolve, in fact, by augmenting the existing Cornish Earldom and this was at a date prior to the 16th March 1337. The First Duchy Charter, inappropriately called 'the Charter of Creation', dated 17th March 1337, does, in fact, refer to the Duchy as having already been created - as does a Patent creating the new Earl of Salisbury dated 16th March 1337 - and even states when :
"..being in our present Parliament, convened at Westminster, on Monday next after the feast of St. Matthias the Apostle last past, ...."
The Officers of the Duchy, during the arbitration over the foreshore, estimated this to be:
"The particular time of this investiture, that is to say, that it preceded the 1st Duchy Charter, and was on some day between the 24th of February, the Feast of St. Mathias, and the 16th of March, is demonstrated by the patent of creation of the Earl of Salisbury, who, with others, was at that time created Earl in honour of the Prince, as stated by Lord Coke."
The original Act of creation is no longer in existence but has been referred to extensively in later Acts of Parliament. The following extract, from these references, is very significant,
"...that the County of Cornwall should always remain as a Duchy to the eldest sons of the Kings of England... without being given elsewhere".
So you see the contributor my write of this claim of an original act of creation but further acts prove its existence and that is all that counts.
No I insist that rightly comitas can be translated to mean county today but it was also used to describe the community of people in an area the masses if you like hence the people of Devon or the people of Cornwall. What comitas does not indicate at this time is any further constitutional status. The meaning has changed over time and that the contributor fails to see this is telling.
At the time it was quite common for estates to be held outside Duchies, Earldoms etc by the temporal lord or ducal position. Take for instance Brittany; at the height of its independence from the Kingdom of France the Duke of Brittany held estates all over France and even in England all outside Brittany. This does not mean however that Brittany was not a Duchy. The Sultan of Brunei could for example buy large parts of the Scottish highlands but that would not make them Brunei or mean the sultanate did not exist.
Well the charters do annex the civil administration of the county of Cornwall to the Duchy and also speak of augmenting the Earldom/county into a Duchy for ever.
As to the Duchy being inside the Kingdom of England well yes I agree however Wales, parts of Ireland, Calais and other continental territories where all at one time part of the Kingdom of England however this does not make them English or part of the country of England. A distinction should be drawn between the country and Kingdom, when the kingdom was united with that of Scotland in the 18th century did that mean the country of England ceased to exist? Of course not!
The Tamar bridge act recognises that the Cornish foreshore and river beds are the responsibility of the Duchy. This responsibility was defended successfully in the 19th century by the attorney general of the Duchy who used the following argument, an argument that claims Cornwall is a Duchy.
On behalf of the Duchy in its successful action against the Crown, which resulted in the Cornwall Submarine Mines Act of 1858, Sir George Harrison (Attorney General for Cornwall) makes this submission.
1. That Cornwall, like Wales, was at the time of the Conquest, and was subsequently treated in many respects as distinct from England. 2. That it was held by the Earls of Cornwall with the rights and prerogative of a County Palatine, as far as regarded the Seignory or territorial dominion. 3. That the Dukes of Cornwall have from the creation of the Duchy enjoyed the rights and prerogatives of a County Palatine, as far as regarded seignory or territorial dominion, and that to a great extent by Earls. 4. That when the Earldom was augmented into a Duchy, the circumstances attending to it's creation, as well as the language of the Duchy Charter, not only support and confirm natural presumption, that the new and higher title was to be accompanied with at least as great dignity, power, and prerogative as the Earls enjoyed, but also afforded evidence that the Duchy was to be invested with still more extensive rights and privileges. 5. The Duchy Charters have always been construed and treated, not merely by the Courts of Judicature, but also by the Legislature of the Country, as having vested in the Dukes of Cornwall the whole territorial interest and dominion of the Crown in and over the entire County of Cornwall.
Why where pre-Tudor laws often typically designated to take effect in Anglia et Cornubia (that is, in England and Cornwall) if Cornwall was just a county of England.
Why did Polydore Vergil, an Italian cleric commissioned by King Henry VII to write a history of England, states that "The whole country of Britain is divided into four parts, whereof the one is inhabited by Englishmen, the other of Scots, the third of Welshmen, the fourth of Cornish people ... and which all differ among themselves either in tongue, either in manners, or else in laws and ordinances."
Why did King Henry VIII's coronation procession includes "nine children of honour" representing "England and France, Gascony, Guienne, Normandy, Anjou, Cornwall, Wales and Ireland. All geographical regions but not the Duchy of Cornwall, why no child for Devon?
Why did the Italian diplomat Lodovico Falier (From the court of King Henry VIII) writes in a letter that "The language of the English, Welsh and Cornish men is so different that they do not understand each other". He also claims it is possible to distinguish the members of each group by alleged "national characteristics".
Why did the French ambassador in London, Gaspard de Coligny Chatillon, writing to his government indicates ethnic differences thus: "The kingdom of England is by no means a united whole, for it also contains Wales and Cornwall, natural enemies of the rest of England, and speaking a [different] language".
Following Queen Elizabeth I's death, why did the Venetian ambassador write that the "late queen had ruled over five different 'peoples': 'English, Welsh, Cornish, Scottish ... and Irish'".
Why did Arthur Hopton (later ambassador to Madrid?) writes that "England is ... divided into three great Provinces, or Countries ... speaking a several and different language, as English, Welsh and Cornish".
Treaty of Bretigny John, by the Grace of God, King of England, Lord of Ireland, Duke of Normandy and Aquitaine, Earl of Anjou confirmed the aforesaid, and Richard, King of Germany and Earl of Cornwall, in like manner, confirmed the aforesaid. Why in this treaty is Cornwall mentioned if it is just a county of England and the title no more than an honorary one with a few landed estates? All the others where actual geographic region and titles of governance but not Cornwall!?
Lastly I am described as a crony, extremist and conspiracy theorist well does that mean that the Royal Kilbrandon report was also written by extremist Cornish nationalists because this report also suggested that the territory of Cornwall should be referred to as a Duchy in recognition of its constitutional position, admittedly in England but still a Duchy!
Fulub, Iv'e just linked the celtic map on the this is not Cornwall site to here http://www.manxman.co.im/cleague/ At the side of the map I have the nations listed in English and was wondering whether there were any sites I could link these to, thought you might know of some?
After after a letter from the department of constitutional affairs saying they would nolonger respond to me and that the issue is the responsibility of the ODP (also contacted) i have heard nothing and i don't expect to either.
The Duchy has also failed to respond.
So this is the stone wall beyond which citizens cannot pass. This is where democracy, transparency, human rights and the governments responsibility to its citizens ends!
Usually story really, everybody thinks they have all the answers but does no more than talk and argue between themselves. Power in numbers...Yes I agree with you Abieuan
I'm currently creating a website that I think may be considered somewhat "charismatic" and that can create a 'united' and 'exclusive' Cornish network with the potential to create movement in a forward direction so as to avoid 'division' or 'weakness' among the residents of kernow. I hope to have it ready very soon. I am also looking for a few people who are up for checking it out and providing feedback and ideas for it's future use, before it goes live.
maybe we need to protest at the olympics -that the world needs to recognise our legitimate right for self determination. I ma not advocating the hostage taking of the english team or even a moslem one - no heaven forbid such shenanighans - but a non violent protest which makes the world aware of our rights as the indigenous people of britain.
No charges over fatal hotel fire
No-one will be charged over the Penhallow hotel fire in Cornwall which killed three people last year.
'Green' speedboat in Cornwall
A record breaking speedboat powered by bio diesel arrives in Cornwall to raise awareness of renewable fuels.
Lifeboats cut speed to cut costs
Lifeboat crews on training exercises are told to cut their speed in an effort to reduce soaring fuel costs.
Teenager survives 60ft cliff fall
A teenage holidaymaker is lucky to be alive after falling 60ft (18.3m) down a cliff on to rocks in Cornwall.
Warning over 'charity' collectors
Warnings are issued in Cornwall about a firm claiming to be collecting clothes for charity.
Farmers get go-ahead on ski plans
Cornish farmers diversify into building a £3m artificial ski and snowboard slope near Newquay.
Curfew yields encouraging results
Police say results are "very encouraging" for a voluntary curfew to reduce anti-social behaviour in a Cornish town.
Delay on cancelled concert cash
A ticket agent in Cornwall says it is trying to get information about refunds for cancelled concerts.
