Not even close to the greatest. Richard was a useless king who spent all his time indulging his whims in the Holy Land. Now Alfred, there was a king who deserves the epithet Greatest.
That’s sort of like pointing out that George Washington didn’t speak American. Britain is a landmass which was ruled by various rulers in various territories. It became England- a country- when the landmass was declared officially under one authority as a nation.
The country of England was founded in the 10th century. Richard I was king in the 11th century.
So why didn’t he speak English almost 100 years later? Well… remember England became a country in the 10th century- but the first records of early “English” come from the 5th century. The language existed before the country. It was brought through places like Germany into the south of Britain and displaced Celtic languages and British Latin etc. spoken by local peoples. What we know today as “English” didn’t exist until around the 15th century- 4 centuries after the death of Richard I.
We retroactively call the languages that directly “morphed” into modern English “english” because those languages were adopted by England-
And the Anglo Saxon languages that led to English are essentially dead languages- no longer spoken or used commonly save for in their influence on languages they sired or impacted. Think of it this way- say that a bunch of Star Trek fans settle Mars and decide to speak Alien languages from the show as Mars’s language. So people speaking Klingon and Ferangi etc. are living and working together and picking up words and pronunciations etc. In 400 years, that language would have likely become its own unique language- and if there is no more Star Trek and no one left speaking Star Trek languages- we would probably call the new language something like “Martian,” because it came from mars. Historians wouid find old documents of earlier versions of the language that was closed to maybe inform but still different and maybe call that “old Martian” or something.
So basically- a bunch of people who spoke different languages all lived on an island that was not a country, and they borrowed and picked up aspects of each other’s languages to form a new language that over time became the dominant language, and so they named the language after the country. This pattern repeats to some degree all over. “German” came about from different languages mingling and “Germany” wasn’t a place at one point, and became a country later.
George Washington didn’t speak “American” and no one did when America was founded. America has existed a little over 200 years as a country, but it has been settled by Europeans for a bit longer than that, so it had already begun developing its own linguistic quirks and dialects and such- so today in 2022, the “English” spoken in America and The UK differ in many ways from spelling to slang and even definitions and context for many words. Most “English” speaking countries can understand each other fine for the most part- Australia and America and Britain for example have linguistic differences but we are all pretty close- close enough that the language is still considered English for now, but it could one day not be the case.
Your comments are correct @guest_ but the point is that Richard could barely speak any form of English. He hardly set foot in England, so of course he couldn't speak Middle English, the language of the 12th century. His brother John I, who succeeded him, certainly did, even though Norman French would have been spoken at court. Richard basically thought England and the English were beneath him, or at least that the only use they had for him was as a source of income.
Nicely said- and in my opinion you did an excellent job of giving facts while providing editorial context without undue bias. I know you weren’t replying to point it out specifically- but I would say that my answer does not properly contextualize the situation as it pertains to Richard I and could be misleading. I thank you for this reply @snowbeast.
Right back atcha @guest_ I'm afraid I don't often respond to your comments, entirely due to my own laziness. But in this case I must. I have a personal grudge against the Norman invasion, still carrying a chip after 956 years.
Lol. That’s a heck of a chip. No hard feelings either on the replies. I enjoy your posts and replies in general- but funny enough I mostly post when I’m lazy- as paradoxical as that might seem- so I totally understand.
The country of England was founded in the 10th century. Richard I was king in the 11th century.
So why didn’t he speak English almost 100 years later? Well… remember England became a country in the 10th century- but the first records of early “English” come from the 5th century. The language existed before the country. It was brought through places like Germany into the south of Britain and displaced Celtic languages and British Latin etc. spoken by local peoples. What we know today as “English” didn’t exist until around the 15th century- 4 centuries after the death of Richard I.
We retroactively call the languages that directly “morphed” into modern English “english” because those languages were adopted by England-