Runboard.com
You're welcome.
Community logo


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


Page:  1  2  3  4  5  6  7 

 
Gyrth Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Registered user
Global user

Registered: 02-2006
Posts: 123
Karma: 1 (+1/-0)
Reply | Quote
OMG, wait...


quote:

Our Forum does not share the majority views of The Catholic [sign in to see URL] you? its not clear that by reproducing your extracts here what your views are so I deduce you swallow that belief system's view wholesale.

...are you saying that... you, who glorify "Cluniasts" or whatever you call them - do not "swallow" the Catholic belief system? Uhm, are you not aware that Cistercian monks were and are Catholic? Or... ? emoticon ? What part of Catholicism are you rejecting... everything but this one strict small branch of monasticism that "faded" over a thousand years ago?

 emoticon

You guys have now passed the "scary" threshhold.

Interesting that they amassed "excessive wealth." Would that have been after the conquest of England? Did the wealth of the English churches somehow, miraculously, wind up in the hands of "Cluniasts?" Bet so.
Mar/23/2006, 5:59 pm Link to this post Send Email to Gyrth   Send PM to Gyrth
 
mousteriana Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Registered user
Global user

Registered: 03-2005
Posts: 936
Karma: 6 (+6/-0)
Reply | Quote
Re: OMG, wait...


Gyrth:

I doubt if they even have the intellectual capacity to even *recognize* what Catholicism is! They collectively seem to have the approximate intelligence of a flatworm, and that's probably insulting flatworms!
Anne G






quote:

Gyrth wrote:

quote:

Our Forum does not share the majority views of The Catholic [sign in to see URL] you? its not clear that by reproducing your extracts here what your views are so I deduce you swallow that belief system's view wholesale.

...are you saying that... you, who glorify "Cluniasts" or whatever you call them - do not "swallow" the Catholic belief system? Uhm, are you not aware that Cistercian monks were and are Catholic? Or... ? emoticon ? What part of Catholicism are you rejecting... everything but this one strict small branch of monasticism that "faded" over a thousand years ago?

 emoticon

You guys have now passed the "scary" threshhold.

Interesting that they amassed "excessive wealth." Would that have been after the conquest of England? Did the wealth of the English churches somehow, miraculously, wind up in the hands of "Cluniasts?" Bet so.



Mar/24/2006, 4:23 am Link to this post Send Email to mousteriana   Send PM to mousteriana
 
Housecarl 1066 Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Registered user
Global user

Registered: 02-2006
Location: Northern-most Saxon border.
Posts: 620
Karma: 1 (+1/-0)
Reply | Quote
Re: OMG, wait...


Anne and Gyrth

WTF plagiarise only the choicest biased sources from the internet, then copy/paste their tripe which is only shored up by their re-edited, vile and childish diatribes!

The fact that even the abNormans themselves call it a "Conquest"(acquisition) suggests their admission that they won by military invasion, and not by any definite or solid 'promise' by King Edward to his (very)distant ducal kinsmen of illegitimate birth who had no English blood.

Also, much is made by the abNormans that earl Godwin supposedly murdered Edward's brother, Alfred, in 1036(actually he followed Harefoot's orders and handed Alfred over to an admittedly cruel end- as any loyal earl would for his king)...but little is mentioned of King Edward's own nephew(Walter- and his wife) dying in duke William's jail, maybe by poisoning- as did many other claimants/rivals.

Last edited by Housecarl 1066, Mar/24/2006, 7:11 am


---
http://1066andallthat.forumfree.co.uk/
Mar/24/2006, 7:03 am Link to this post Send Email to Housecarl 1066   Send PM to Housecarl 1066
 
Gyrth Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Registered user
Global user

Registered: 02-2006
Posts: 123
Karma: 1 (+1/-0)
Reply | Quote
Anne...


...that's why I was thinking that WTF is/are very young, and is unable, at this point, to see the obvious. Or to even consider the possibility that they don't know what they're talking about.

Housecarl, "abNorman"... ROTFL!

I just read about Walter, Count of Maine, last night. There were "rumors" passed on by Orderic Vitalis about his sudden death, but nothing beyond [sign in to see URL] that it happened while in William's custody. Yet I've seen no explanation for why Edward's nephew and his Countess suddenly turned up dead immediately after William seized Le Mans. As David Bates says, no one thought William incapable of such an act, at that point - he had already proven himself to be ruthless when it came to acquiring power and land, and he would allow nothing and no one, and certainly no questions of morality, to stop him from taking what he thought he had a right to.
Mar/24/2006, 6:49 pm Link to this post Send Email to Gyrth   Send PM to Gyrth
 
mousteriana Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Registered user
Global user

Registered: 03-2005
Posts: 936
Karma: 6 (+6/-0)
Reply | Quote
Re: Hugues de Cluny


Gyrth:

My guess, from a "modern POV, is that William was basically very insecure, and his ruthlessness and singlemindedness was probably a coverup for this. He had reason, as Bates, and others have pointed out over and over, to feel this way. I would almost feel sorry for the man if he hadn't done so much damaage to a country and society not his own, and who made no real effort ot understand it.
Anne G
Mar/24/2006, 9:47 pm Link to this post Send Email to mousteriana   Send PM to mousteriana
 
Gyrth Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Registered user
Global user

Registered: 02-2006
Posts: 123
Karma: 1 (+1/-0)
Reply | Quote
agree completely, Anne...


...I've always thought that William's avarice and need for autonomous power stemmed from a deep insecurity complex. Still, Harold is the more sympathetic of the two characters, if only because he was undermined by fate and bad luck more than anything. Or, you could say, his inability to control the one situation that, in the end, did him in, and that was his relationship with Tostig. Without that one catalyst, the English would have triumphed at Hastings, beyond a doubt - they would've been fully manned, prepared, and there would have been Tostig there, too, even if Harold had gone down. But I've always thought of Tostig as eaten up with jealousy over his brother's success, and so... it was inevitable, I suppose.

As for William - who, the more I read about him, the more I loathe him - the only consolation is that he had not a moment of peace after 1066 - little consolation, actually, since the man thrived on violence and betrayal. It was his life's blood, it seems, so it's questionable as to how much real inner conflict it caused him. He met a fitting end, that's for sure.
Mar/27/2006, 2:31 am Link to this post Send Email to Gyrth   Send PM to Gyrth
 
mousteriana Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Registered user
Global user

Registered: 03-2005
Posts: 936
Karma: 6 (+6/-0)
Reply | Quote
Re: Hugues de Cluny


Gyrth:

Psychologically, and from a "modern" POV, at least, William had reason to feel insecure. And, as I said, it was probably that insecurity that led to his violent and avaricious nature. First, his childhood must have been, well, not very "orderly". When Duke Robert died, he was only seven or eight years old --- and this can be a traumatic time for a child to experience death in the family. On top of that, people then did not like child rulers, for fairly obvious reasons, and various factions tried to kill him off. Literally. It was only when he was about sixteen or seventeen, that he was able to assume control of Normandy.

In addition to the fact that his father died, he was, as people now say, "the child of an informal relationship". This too must have added further insecurity to his character; although he was the only possible successor(apparently), Robert equally apparently hadn't bothered to formally announce this claim, and then he went off on a pilgrimage to Jerusalem, and subsequently died, either on the way to or on the way from. The problem here is, that various lords probably thought they could do a better job, being adults, but William, a child, was in the way. . . .you can imagine the result, and apparently the chroniclers recorded the result.

Finally, there is the whole question of his relationship to the king of France. He finally became the most powerful person in France, yet he had to pay homage to the French king. *If* Edward "the Confessor" actually did promise him the succession to the ENglish throne(which I don't think is terribly likely, except, perhaps, as a joke to a small boy), that would have seemed an unbeatable "deal": both he and the king of France could be equals.

Of course, people in medieval times did not "psychologize" as people nowadays sometimes do, but one can't help thinking that William might not have turned out *quite* as he did had his childhood and young manhood not been such a continuous "battle".
Mar/27/2006, 4:57 pm Link to this post Send Email to mousteriana   Send PM to mousteriana
 
Athelstan937 Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Registered user
Global user

Registered: 11-2005
Location: The Lands of the Hicce
Posts: 127
Karma: 2 (+2/-0)
Reply | Quote
Re: Hugues de Cluny


 Anne,Strange how many historical figures fit the same personality profile as William seems to have had.
The need for him to attempt to obliterate all opposition real or imaginary resulting in 'The Harrowing of The North'
I suspect this personality was what drove the 'Norman Conquest' rather than any dubious notions of'Revolutionary Cluniacism' whatever that may be.
Athelstan,Warrior of the Hicce
Mar/27/2006, 5:05 pm Link to this post Send Email to Athelstan937   Send PM to Athelstan937
 
mousteriana Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Registered user
Global user

Registered: 03-2005
Posts: 936
Karma: 6 (+6/-0)
Reply | Quote
Re: Hugues de Cluny


Athelstan:

I believe the awful event to which you refer is called "the Harrying of the North". But the results were the same. And were apparently condemned by everyone. Even chroniclers more or less contemporaneous with William did not recognize him as a "nice guy". I don't know if "personality" necessarily drove all the events of that time, but it played a not inconsiderable part.
Anne G
Mar/27/2006, 5:08 pm Link to this post Send Email to mousteriana   Send PM to mousteriana
 
Athelstan937 Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Registered user
Global user

Registered: 11-2005
Location: The Lands of the Hicce
Posts: 127
Karma: 2 (+2/-0)
Reply | Quote
Re: Hugues de Cluny


Anne, the term harrying derives from the original 'harrowing' I believe.
Even so as you say the results were the same.
Mar/27/2006, 5:32 pm Link to this post Send Email to Athelstan937   Send PM to Athelstan937
 


Add a reply

Page:  1  2  3  4  5  6  7 





You are not logged in (login)