1066 was fucking bullshit

That's the thing about invasions, they typically don't care if you win the moral argument.

You can always drop your fucked up language in favor of old english.

Good luck.

>>1866487
>heptarchy
>1066

>>1866527
We're doing it now
http://anglish.wikia.com/wiki/Main_leaf

>>1866531
I was more referring to the Anglo Saxon style of governance as a whole.

>>1866487

>Fyrd was a perfectly fine system, the heptarchy had good governance, it had flaws but they should have been negligible if literally everything hadn't gone wrong.

Nothing would have gone wrong if they weren't tied to the shitty fyrd system. It is entirely the systematic problems of the anglo-saxon system that led to their downfall.

>>1866503
The gay cunts even depicted the arrow-in-the-eye on the Bayeux Tapestry to symbolize Godwinson as illegitimate to rule.

>>1866564
How was it different than any other feudal levy?

>>1866564
It was a system that could draft troops and keep Earls happy, and doing such a thing in Early Middle Ages Europe was tough to do.
It was the non-stop Viking raids coupled with Norman invasion that made it crack. They were gang-raped and almost made it, others never would've stood a chance.

>>1866559
Don't use the word 'heptarchy' then, when it refers to literally 'seven' kingdoms.

>>1866584

Ordinary feudal levies could keep their men in place for longer services of time in the case of an emergency, and were also being phased out in favor of troops tied to their leaders by systems of pay, with the feudal service being replaced by taxes. William's forces were paid mercenaries.

Plus, as far as I'm aware, Anglo-Saxon England had the only feudal levied navy in Europe at the time, but I could easily be wrong on that score.
>>1866589

>It was a system that could draft troops

But it couldn't keep them in the field, even when they were needed, not for love or money.


>and keep Earls happy,

lolwut. Those northern Earls were perennial sources of trouble.


>It was the non-stop Viking raids coupled with Norman invasion that made it crack.

In a series of battles where the Anglo-Saxons had either the numerical advantage or at least parity in every single one. Where they would have had overwhelming advantages if they were able to mobilize the entire country's resources, instead of "whoever the fuck happened to live nearby". Hell, if they could keep their navy together, William probably never oculd have landed.

>They were gang-raped and almost made it, others never would've stood a chance.

Tthey actually had enormously more resources than their two adversaries combined. Literally anyone else, if the Anglo-Saxons had anything resembling the sort of governance they had in mainland Europe, would have brushed this stuff aside, and done so easily.

>>1866593
Well wasn't 1066 England the heptarchy, just all fucked up? What kingdoms were missing?

File: Untitled.png (1MB, 919x913px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 919x913px

>>1866487
>1066 AD
>"Germanic" "nation"

>>1866623
>the land full of Anglo-Saxons, that is characterized as Anglo-Saxon, isn't going to be Germanic

File: 1421532515906.png (2MB, 1555x1480px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1555x1480px

>>1866487

Not only that, but the very flower of your nobility cut and replaced. The very wombs of their wives, the titles of their children given over to their Franco-Norman conquers and their heirs.

Sad.

>>1866487
I'm sick of this anti-norman meme.
People grew out of the 'norman-yoke' conspiracy ages ago, just let it go and get on with your life.

>>1866610
The Fyrd was invented for the sake of being able to quickly draft troops for the sake of responding to Viking raids, something that was introduced by Alfred the Great after Wessex was about the last holdout from the Great Heathen Army. They needed a manner of response that didn't include pulling away huge amounts of men.
Another kingdom could have fielded a large army, but they were not in the place of England and constant huge reserves weren't doable. They DID have regular, non-levy soldiers and the Housecarls performed well but after multiple major engagements and plenty of marching, they were thinned and exhausted. You can talk all day about how Stamford Bridge was a victory, numerical superiority, but in the end, fighting and marching is tiring no matter how you slice it.

>>1866657
t. totally-not-a-frog

>>1866700
I'm English.

>>1866564
>systematic
Systemic.

>>1866618
No. England was unified by the House of Wessex a century at this point. Is American education really this bad?

>>1866690

>Another kingdom could have fielded a large army, but they were not in the place of England and constant huge reserves weren't doable.

They quite literally were doable, and in fact done, since you had 3 completely separate fyrds for the three major battles of 1066. That's to say nothing of the sea fyrd.

And of course, to deal with constant raiding attacks, other polities in Europe went with the much more efficient mounted warrior concept. Nor were their feudal levies so hidebound in terms of time and calling up. In fact, you saw an end to viking raids much later in England than just about anywhere else, indicating that it was still profitable to raid there for the Vikings long after it had ceased to be so elsewhere.

>, numerical superiority, but in the end, fighting and marching is tiring no matter how you slice it.


Except that there's no indication that fatigue played any sort of factor at Hastings. Harold seemed to be looking to repeat his surprise attack in the early morning trick, and the battle lasted what? 8, 9 hours? A lot longer than most medieval battles, that's for sure, and there's no mention in any of the primary sources of slowed reaction times or people dropping from weariness; what did them in was the poor discipline of the green fyrd charging without orders, and a sudden morale collapse when the leader died.

>>1866727

Thanks for the correction. I type too fast.

Reminder the english are not anglo-saxons, but celts, no conquest of the british isles has had significant impact on the genetic makeup of the british people

>>1866745
>too fast.
too quickly.

>>1866751
While there are still a lot of celts, I'm pretty sure anglo-saxons are pretty far spread, especially in some areas.

File: Germanic_Europe.gif (66KB, 800x545px) Image search: [Google]

66KB, 800x545px

>>1866751
O rly?

>>1866751

Britons are Celts.

>>1866751
Genes don't mean shit. Germanic is an ethnicity, and ethnicity is determined by culture.

>>1866845

>Genes don't mean shit.

That is a retarded thing to say.

>>1866713
>t. Patrick Fitzroy

Anglo-Saxon traditional rights and liberties were reestablished by the Magna Carta and then enshrined in the Bill of Rights anyway.

We only need to get rid of the monarchy and the aristocracy, establish a Republican government and name the Parliament the "Witenagemot", and then the Norman yoke will finally end.

We're so fucking close.

>>1866845
good luck with your white niggers or your american cholos

>>1866892
>getting rid of the Norman yoke by resembling their modern way of government in France

>>1866957
France overthrew their monarchy and established an even worse, more centralized and authoritarian government in its place.

I envision England overthrowing the monarchy and establishing a descentralized republic like the United States instead.

>>1866648
eh, some recent research is saying the Anglo-Saxon invasion almost entirely drove out the Celtic British and Romano-British culture, but the genetic markers of most Brits is still closer to the Irish than the mainland Germans. So it depends if you mean a "Germanic" nation by culture (yes) or by blood (no).

Personally I think by culture is good enough, as it's not like we're talking wildly different phenotypes, like "Germanic" Africans or something.

>>1867062

Actually, the most recent genetic research indicates that the overwhelming majority of British descent is from the people who were there before the Celts showed up.

File: 96e[1].jpg (18KB, 431x500px) Image search: [Google]

18KB, 431x500px

>>1867067

>>1866735
Honestly, why would American education focus on the specifics of English dynasties a thousand years in the past? Yes, the Norman conquest is taught, but not the earlier Anglo-Saxon history. The conquest itself is certainly relevant for larger world history and the development of the English-speaking world, but for the very same reasons, the pre-conquest setup in England isn't. And being American, rather than British, it by definition isn't our national history that we learn much more deeply than that of other countries, as is true in most countries.

I'm talking about the sort of general world history course a high schooler gets. Obviously if you take more specialized courses in college you get a deeper understanding.

>>1867067
Before the Celts? What... Picts, or some sort of non-IE people like the Basques? I'm honestly lost.

>>1867106
see
>>1867073

>>1867094
Our justice system has a huge amount of influence from pre-Norman England. Where do you think the jury comes from?

>>1867130
I don't get it.

>>1867106

I vaguely remember reading something that indicated there were links to the people in the Franco-Cantabrian region, which would probably indicate they were non IE people like Basques. There's no evidence of writing, or even pictograms as far as I'm aware, so pinning down a language is tricky, but given that the earliest evidence of settlement (post Ice-age) is around 4,000ish B.C., I don't think the IE's got that far yet.


Sorry, it's late where I am and I'm too tired to go digging through my material.

>>1867106

Celts are Indo-European, there were people in Europe before them.

>>1867155
>it's late where I am
lol time doesn't change with location the earth doesn't spin at relativistic speeds we'd all fly off

>>1867168

But sleep cycles are generally based around ambient light levels, and I don't know about you, but my brain doesn't work so well when it's gone too long without.

>>1867067

The guys who built Stonehenge?

>>1867168
>>1867173
obvious troll is obvious

>>1866867
>>1866946
Yup. Your 1/16th Swedish heritage ensured your place as a Swede. Not that you can speak the language, or that you attend the religious ceremonies, or live the lifestyle of one. Nope, that's all fluff.

File: REEEEEEEEEEE.jpg (151KB, 624x617px) Image search: [Google]

151KB, 624x617px

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tYKPdNvH800

>>1867067
The Stone Age people who lived off shellfish 8000 years ago? Bullshit. They got absorbed and vanished.