Runboard.com
You're welcome.
Community logo


runboard.com       Sign up (learn about it) | Sign in (lost password?)


Page:  1  2  3  4  5 ... 19  20  21 

 
thewilliam theredforum2002 Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Registered user
Global user

Registered: 03-2004
Posts: 484
Karma: -5 (+2/-7)
Reply | Quote
Re: William the Conqueror


Anne,WorkMonkey called our Forum liars without any substantiaton and,as anyone who dishes out that kind of stuff at us,got a suitably tailored reply.
To deal with your other [sign in to see URL] the Anglo-Saxon Revolution of 451 broke the power of the predominantly Celtic ruling elite which had overthrown the Roman Empire in 410 they destroyed any opposition in their way in what became Angleland/Anglaland in the years that followed. You seem to have one rule for the Conqueror and another for those who preceded [sign in to see URL] Conqueror only did, on a far smaller scale, during his suppression of the Counter-Revolutionary rising in the North of Angleland in 1069, to what to take a further example,General Sherman did during his historic march through Georgia(March To The Sea) in 1864 which,definitively,ended Slavery in the United [sign in to see URL], the comparison extends further since without the Conqueror's victory,and the triumph of The Norman Revolution 1058-1100,Slavery would never have been wiped out in Angleland by the early decades of the 12th Century.

Franc B, First Secretary (personal capacity)
Sep/3/2005, 3:53 pm Link to this post Send Email to thewilliam theredforum2002   Send PM to thewilliam theredforum2002
 
mousteriana Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Registered user
Global user

Registered: 03-2005
Posts: 936
Karma: 6 (+6/-0)
Reply | Quote
Re: William the Conqueror


All:

What"Anglo-Saxon Revolution" are you talkingabout?????? This whole episode was basically part of the various "tribal" movements all over Europe(at the breakup of the Roman Empire for all practical purposes). And what on earthare you talking about when you mention a "Counterrevolution" in 1069, which William put down with incredible savagery? That's not what the English call it, even to this day. . . .
Anne G
Sep/3/2005, 7:07 pm Link to this post Send Email to mousteriana   Send PM to mousteriana
 
WorkMonkey Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Registered user
Global user

Registered: 08-2005
Posts: 9
Karma: 0 (+0/-0)
Reply | Quote
Re: William the Conqueror


the AS certainly invaded culturally and socially but most of the evidence doesn't point towards nation wide genocide.
It's "Briton" as well, or "Romano British" not "Celt" I hate that word.
Sep/5/2005, 8:11 am Link to this post Send Email to WorkMonkey   Send PM to WorkMonkey
 
mousteriana Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Registered user
Global user

Registered: 03-2005
Posts: 936
Karma: 6 (+6/-0)
Reply | Quote
Re: William the Conqueror


WorkMonkey:

I don't get the impression of "widespread genocide" from the AS invasions or incursions or whatever they were. In any case, why would the AS leaders want to kill off all potential followers(and sources of possible revenue)? That would have made no sense in the context of the time.
Anne G
Sep/6/2005, 4:14 am Link to this post Send Email to mousteriana   Send PM to mousteriana
 
WorkMonkey Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Registered user
Global user

Registered: 08-2005
Posts: 9
Karma: 0 (+0/-0)
Reply | Quote
Re: William the Conqueror


I said "doesn't point towards nation wide geonicide" not "does" there'd be little point in slaughtering the entire populace of Britannia because you wouldn't be able to replace it quick enough which would mean the land wouldn't be able to support itself.
Sep/6/2005, 8:40 am Link to this post Send Email to WorkMonkey   Send PM to WorkMonkey
 
mousteriana Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Registered user
Global user

Registered: 03-2005
Posts: 936
Karma: 6 (+6/-0)
Reply | Quote
Re: William the Conqueror


Workmonkey:

Sorry for the wording being confusing. I was actually supporting your argument.
Anne G
Sep/6/2005, 8:32 pm Link to this post Send Email to mousteriana   Send PM to mousteriana
 
thewilliam theredforum2002 Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Registered user
Global user

Registered: 03-2004
Posts: 484
Karma: -5 (+2/-7)
Reply | Quote
Re: William the Conqueror


WorkMonkey&Anne:::Re: 411&451 Have either of you heard of Ambrosius,Vortigern and Hengist and Horsa???? No amount of denial or disingenuity of which you both seem to have an inexhaustible supply could possibly make the suppression of the Angle-Saxon-Dane Counter-Revolution in 1069 by the Conqueror's Revolutionary Army even remotely comparable to the horrendous loss of life that ensued after 411 and 451.
Martin Tilston (personal capacity)
Sep/7/2005, 9:13 pm Link to this post Send Email to thewilliam theredforum2002   Send PM to thewilliam theredforum2002
 
mousteriana Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Registered user
Global user

Registered: 03-2005
Posts: 936
Karma: 6 (+6/-0)
Reply | Quote
Re: William the Conqueror


Martin and all:

WorkMonkey&Anne:::Re: 411&451 Have either of you heard of Ambrosius,Vortigern and Hengist and Horsa???? No amount of denial or disingenuity of which you both seem to have an inexhaustible supply could possibly make the suppression of the Angle-Saxon-Dane Counter-Revolution in 1069 by the Conqueror's Revolutionary Army even remotely comparable to the horrendous loss of life that ensued after 411 and 451.

Uhhhhh. . . . .Yeah(I can't speak for WorkMonkey, though). I've "heard" of all these people. And I know what they are *supposed* to have done. YOu have to remember that, unless you believe every word of the chronicles about them is literally true, there may have been considerable "inflation of numbers" involved. And these people are half mythical in any case. Furthermore, it is absolutely *patronizing* to ask a question like that --- assuming WorkMonkey and I have so little knowledge of historical events in Britain as not to be aware of the ASJ invasions or incursions, or whatever they were, of 411 and 451. Something *did* occur, all right, but it's unlikely to have occurred on the scale you seem to be implying. AS I said, in the first place, the invaders would have looked on the invadees at the very least, as a source of revenue that could be taxed. Geez. we all know the *Normans* did that. And that was one of the reasons for the "counterrevolution" you people are always yapping about. Nobody likes having their taxes raise. And particularly, I think, nobody in England liked having their taxes raised in *French*. But this aspect of things just doesn't seem to bother you folks, despite the abundant evidence otherwise.
Anne G
Sep/8/2005, 7:45 pm Link to this post Send Email to mousteriana   Send PM to mousteriana
 
thewilliam theredforum2002 Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Registered user
Global user

Registered: 03-2004
Posts: 484
Karma: -5 (+2/-7)
Reply | Quote
posticon Re: William the Conqueror


Today, 9th September, marks the 918th anniversary of the Conqueror’s death. Our Forum observes with all due solemnity his passing but also salute the grandeur of his Revolutionist-Cluniacist achievements and the leadership team he forged: the annihilation of a decadent, corrupt Anglo-Saxon-Dane ruling class which had long outlived its usefulness to History, the expropriation of their wealth and land to ultimately finance the export of The Norman Revolution, the annexation of Angleland to the most advanced political-social force in Europe at the time: The Kingdom Of The Franks and the Revolutionization of Angleland in the creation of the dynamic political entity of Normandy-Angleland. Truly, this man was an historical giant.
 His final victory at Mantes in 1087 where having led his army in a lightning advance through the Vexin which was swarming with Philippe 1’s troops, he drove his enemies inside the walls of the city and then waited just long enough to tempt the garrison to sally out in order to hit them with a surprise attack which opened the gates of the town to his revolutionist [sign in to see URL] Frankish King’s army was in full-scale retreats and the Conqueror was within striking distance of Paris (about 48 kilometres) and a final settling of accounts with Philippe. But it was not to be. He was wounded in mysterious circumstances inside the burning town. Some people today in their desperation for something to criticise point to his corpulence. He was corpulent in old age(60) even by modern obese standards. But how many corpulent old men could have achieved what he did at Mantes and had not death intervened no doubt infinitely more?
 But his lasting legacy must be that great final victory which left such an indelible mark on the mind of the next standard bearer of The Norman Revolution, William the Red. Due to the political pusillanimity of the majority of the Norman leadership after 1087 many of whom crossed into the camp of Counter-Revolution led by the Renegade Odo and Courtheuse and backed by Philippe 1, the Revolution lost nine years until its resurgence between [sign in to see URL] those wrenching times, that which kept the Red firmly on the road his father had opened up was the burning memory of what the Conqueror had achieved and what more needed to be done.

Rob, Chairperson, CT Vice Chairperson. (both on behalf of TWTRF2002)

Sep/9/2005, 9:57 pm Link to this post Send Email to thewilliam theredforum2002   Send PM to thewilliam theredforum2002
 
thewilliam theredforum2002 Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Registered user
Global user

Registered: 03-2004
Posts: 484
Karma: -5 (+2/-7)
Reply | Quote
posticon Re: William the Conqueror


Wonderful posting Rob, CT.
Here is a snippet recently brought to our attention; but firstly a preamble: The day the Conqueror confronted his somewhat wavering and weak-kneed, revolutionist leadership on his deathbed in Saint Gervais Priory was 8th September. The issues, primarily but not exclusively, concerned Odo and Courtheuse both of whom were thorough Counter-Revolutionists whose ultimate patron was Philippe 1, The Frankish King and an inveterate enemy of The Norman Revolution( actually Courtheuse was at Philippe’s Court at the time, a pristine example, we might venture to assume, of that rather touchingly trite saying ‘home is where the heart is’). Philippe openly stated that the Conqueror was ‘like a woman in labour’. The Conqueror responded, “ When I go to mass after the birth, I will offer him a hundred thousand candles”.
Now we come to the snippet which struck us as being more than a trifle significant. According to the Protevangelium of James which is The First Gospel of James of the 2nd Century and the Evangelium de nativitate Mariae which is the Gospel of the Nativity of Mary of the 3rd Century, Hannah was the mother of Mary who became the Mother of God. She acquired a liturgical feast day called the ‘Nativity of The Virgin Mary’ which was 8th September. During his stunning victory at Mantes a church of the Virgin Mary was accidently destroyed and he made full, financial compensation as part of his deathbed decrees, (one of which was that he left Angleland to God which historically made him, among other things, utterly unique among dying monarchs before and since). On the day of his death, the last thing he heard was the bell ringing for Prime in the church of Saint Mary in Rouen. And among his last words were to ‘commend myself to Mary, the holy Mother of God’ . Saint Hannah (or Saint Anne to give her the christianized version of Hannah’s name) is the patron Saint of women in labour. (also Brittany and Canada for the record).
We are of the considered view that 8th September should be recognised, too, as a day of remembrance in the calendar of The Norman Revolution 1058-1100.

Lydia Giles, Dinsdale, John G, Martin Tilston, Sammy (all in personal capacity)
Sep/12/2005, 3:33 pm Link to this post Send Email to thewilliam theredforum2002   Send PM to thewilliam theredforum2002
 


Add a reply

Page:  1  2  3  4  5 ... 19  20  21 





You are not logged in (login)