General Random Conversation..

[toonotl 2963]

[ChezGiven 0]

I'll get back to the problem with the notion of French nationhood during the 11th century later. It's more nuanced than simply saying the Normans weren't French. As that website you posted a link to actually covers briefly. Same question applies for the Bretons, the Basque, the Flemish, the Angevins, etc. Were any of them French? They spoke French. They practiced French customs. They fought as and with Frenchmen. So if they're not French, what does it take to be considered as French in the 11th century? A deep funk?

No they did not speak French. The Bretons, the Basque and all the other regions spoke their own language. The Normans assimilated 'Frankish' as a language and culture which later became modern French but they were not 'french'.

[ChezGiven 0]

There was no collusion between William and the Norwegians. Harold wanted the throne as did William. William's ancestry was Danish in any regard so how he had 'tribal' relations with the Norwegian King is beyond me.

They were Vikings. They both invaded at the same time and it was a military strategy.

 

"Harold Godwinson's victory was short-lived, as only a few weeks later he was defeated by William the Conqueror at the Battle of Hastings. The fact that Harold had to make a forced march to fight Hardrada at Stamford Bridge and then move at utmost speed south to meet the Norman invasion, all in less than three weeks, is widely seen as a primary factor in William's victory at Hastings.[123]"

 

They pulled Harold out of shape. The idea that these fuckers just happened by coincidence to launch concerted attacks at different ends of the country at the same time and toppled the island they had all coveted for centuries is far fetched. There is no written evidence of collusion no, but plenty of academics put it forward as a theory.

[toonotl 2963]

No they did not speak French. The Bretons, the Basque and all the other regions spoke their own language. The Normans assimilated 'Frankish' as a language and culture which later became modern French but they were not 'french'.

 

And French. They spoke French as well. Just as they practised their own and French customs. Engaged in their own and French culture. And identified with their own and French 'nationality'. They were both. That's the nuance. You speak of nuance, but are making an argument that seems very absolute, which it clearly wasn't, and still isn't.

 

Yes the Normans slowly adopted the French language. That's what assimilating into a culture involves. Did I suggest it was instant? I don't think I did.

 

The French spoke Old French during the 11th century, not Frankish. Yes modern French and Frankish/Old French/Middle French are different. I'm not saying they are the same. It was a thousand years ago. But language labels can be pretty arbitrary. As an example, you speak English now, but you would barely understand a word of English from 1,000 years ago. Language change, and the study of it, is also nuanced. Almost every facet of history relating to culture has grey-area, yet you argue in absolutes. Why?

 

They were Vikings. They both invaded at the same time and it was a military strategy.

"Harold Godwinson's victory was short-lived, as only a few weeks later he was defeated by William the Conqueror at the Battle of Hastings. The fact that Harold had to make a forced march to fight Hardrada at Stamford Bridge and then move at utmost speed south to meet the Norman invasion, all in less than three weeks, is widely seen as a primary factor in William's victory at Hastings.[123]"

They pulled Harold out of shape. The idea that these fuckers just happened by coincidence to launch concerted attacks at different ends of the country at the same time and toppled the island they had all coveted for centuries is far fetched. There is no written evidence of collusion no, but plenty of academics put it forward as a theory.

 

There was no collusion. The reason they were both there at the same is because Edward the Confessor died with no clear heir, which sparked a succession war. So no, you're absolutely right, it wasn't a coincidence. Why all the strawmen arguments? Many historians put forward the theory that William knew of Harold's invasion and postponed his own landing by a few weeks to take advantage of it. Others argue that he simply delayed his crossing of the channel due to bad weather. I have not seen 'evidence' that he was colluding with Harold. They both wanted the throne of England. How could they collude with each other when they were in direct competition? Were they going to fuckoff the Godwinson's, then oil up and wrestle to the death for the English throne? ffs.

[ChezGiven 0]

Ok so not collusion or conspiracy as such because that wouldn't make much sense with two forces with ambitions for the crown. If the invasion from the north had succeeded then I doubt they would have ceded power to the south so it can't be a conspiracy to get the Normans into power. My point is that the Norman Vikings knew that there would also be a Viking invasion from the north. They might not have been working together directly but having close cultural ties with a group who you know is about to invade a country and using the timing of that invasion to set your own represents a kind of Viking pincer attack. Thus the point being that when we (the Brits) went down, it wasn't to some garlic-infused handkerchief waving affront from Paris, it was to some of the hardest bastards ever seen in this hemisphere.

 

Whichever way you look at it, this firmly establishes the conquest as a Viking conquest and not a French one. William's Viking victory in the south was militarliy facilitated by the Viking invasion in the north. None of the people in this story are french though, they are all Vikings. Just some of them have been knocking about in the South getting tanned for a few decades.

 

Also the fact that you are referring to a French nation in the 11th century is also contentious. France as a nation didnt really exist then. You should read Grahame Robb's The Discovery Of France. None of the regions were truly assimilated until Napoleon and until that time all of them retained either their own rule of law or language or both. The Normans were able to assimilate themselves into the cultures they invaded, like they did in England, Switzerland and Italy etc. Doesn't make the Normans English, Swiss or Itallian. Nor does it make them French. They were Vikings who were basically good at languages.

[ChezGiven 0]

Just to be clear, they both knew of each others plans to attack and both acted in a way as to exploit that knowledge. They might not have been acting as one group with one objective but that's enough for me.

[toonotl 2963]

Ok so not collusion or conspiracy as such because that wouldn't make much sense with two forces with ambitions for the crown. If the invasion from the north had succeeded then I doubt they would have ceded power to the south so it can't be a conspiracy to get the Normans into power. My point is that the Norman Vikings knew that there would also be a Viking invasion from the north. They might not have been working together directly but having close cultural ties with a group who you know is about to invade a country and using the timing of that invasion to set your own represents a kind of Viking pincer attack. Thus the point being that when we (the Brits) went down, it wasn't to some garlic-infused handkerchief waving affront from Paris, it was to some of the hardest bastards ever seen in this hemisphere.

 

Whichever way you look at it, this firmly establishes the conquest as a Viking conquest and not a French one. William's Viking victory in the south was militarliy facilitated by the Viking invasion in the north. None of the people in this story are french though, they are all Vikings. Just some of them have been knocking about in the South getting tanned for a few decades.

 

Also the fact that you are referring to a French nation in the 11th century is also contentious. France as a nation didnt really exist then. You should read Grahame Robb's The Discovery Of France. None of the regions were truly assimilated until Napoleon and until that time all of them retained either their own rule of law or language or both. The Normans were able to assimilate themselves into the cultures they invaded, like they did in England, Switzerland and Italy etc. Doesn't make the Normans English, Swiss or Itallian. Nor does it make them French. They were Vikings who were basically good at languages.

 

Yep. William knew of Harold's planned invasion, but they were competing forces who took advantage of the incumbent English nobility's situation. For me, that in no way implies collusion. But we can agree to disagree.

 

The invading force was comprised of Norman nobility and French troops, led by a Norman. So it did involve many Frenchmen. However, I can agree that the invading force was not led by an absolute Frenchy garlic waiving nonce, hurling cows and chickens from a trebuchet. I am making the argument that, on the whole, they were also not not French, if that makes any sense at all. For me, the Normans did assimilate into French society enough to be considered, at the very least nominally, French. In my opinion, they had no choice, but to adopt French culture, as they ruled over French peasants, had diplomatic relations with French nobility, and had married saucy French minxes. I completely accept that there was only a specious appearance of French nationhood in the French Kingdom during the 11th century. I'm only referring to French nationality during the 11th century because its the easiest way to refer to the homogeneity of the people's of the French kingdom at the time. I'll definitely give The Discovery of France a look, thanks for the recommendation. If its anything like your music recommendations it'll be a good read.

 

I also understand that the Normans were well travelled with their established colony, of sorts, on Sicily or whatever. Overall, I think this discussion is interesting, and difficult, because it involves so much migration, assimilation and poorly preserved records. It's why the Dark Ages period is so problematic, also. We could argue over the cultural identity of numerous migratory tribes all over Europe from the Middle Ages all the way back throughout antiquity.

 

What I think we should do is simply agree that we are both clearly way cooler than Gem, given we appreciate history more than augmented penis attachments. The forum is better for our tenure.

 

Now get some sleep mate.

Edited July 14, 2015 by toonotl

[Kitman 2204]

Next you'll be claiming Harold Godwinson wasn't German

[toonotl 2963]

Piss off Kitters.

[Kitman 2204]

[PaddockLad 17124]

Next you'll be claiming Harold Godwinson wasn't German

 

The current queen, to give her official title, Frau Saxe Coburg Gotha-Schleswig Holstein Sonderberg Glucksberg strongly refutes this claim

[The Fish 10779]

Didn't know the NASA probe to Pluto is bearing the ashes of the man who discovered it? That's heartwarming.

[Kevin Carr's Gloves 3859]

Didn't know the NASA probe to Pluto is bearing the ashes of the man who discovered it? That's heartwarming.

 

That's cremation for you.

[The Fish 10779]

 

That's cremation for you.

[Alex 34913]

[Kevin Carr's Gloves 3859]

Also stolen from George Takei

 

https://scontent-lhr3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-xaf1/v/t1.0-9/11202847_1308548119174638_1514595897182161735_n.jpg?oh=800929d3975285a66240dc8b4572a24e&oe=56262EED

[Monkeys Fist 42129]

Didn't know the NASA probe to Pluto is bearing the ashes of the man who discovered it? That's heartwarming.

The canister

That's cremation for you.

[The Fish 10779]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7hWOk9gL1Mk

 

kicks off 3minutes in.

Edited July 15, 2015 by The Fish

[toonotl 2963]

This is what Tom sounds like without his 20 pedal array of guitar paraphernalia.

[Gemmill 44498]

I don't really know what was going on there.

[Kevin Carr's Gloves 3859]

Have you seen the dick (Finlay not Tom) claims Duke Ellington was his Godfather.

[The Fish 10779]

I don't really know what was going on there.

 

 

"Quaye, 41, who had hits with Sunday Shining and Even After All, missed a sound check and turned up on stage an hour late. He failed to address the crowd, walked around with his back to the audience and didn't appear to play his guitar during 30 cringeworthy minutes. The audience, who paid £20 a ticket, soon lost interested in the reggae-Britpop band and began to talk amongst themselves."

[Meenzer 15432]

That's what you get for paying to go to a "reggae-Britpop" gig

[toonotl 2963]

Jimmy Page used to play like a god whilst on heroin. This bloke couldn't even master the A scale whilst tipsy.

[Alex 34913]

The bloke doing the kicking off seems like a fucking cunt too tbh. Proper London cool crowd innit?