I'm working on a paper right now over The Battle of Hastings. In doing so, I need to look at competing positions offered by the Normans and Anglo-Saxons, using supporting sources as necessary. Looking for some good primary and secondary sources that can be easily accessed tonight. Was violence immediately sought or did it only occur because other options were exhausted?
The English refused to agree that garlic is the greatest vegetable on earth so frogs made them eat their baguette
>>2268450
I don't have any links for you but I can tell you that both Harald and William knew it was going to be a fight.
>>2268500
kek
William crossed the channel with only one thought: to become king. They exchanged messages about making some kind of deal but they knew that was just for show. Battle was inevitable.
>>2268506
Even the English secondary source we used for class seemed to make this much clear. It's a shame he wasn't an academic and didn't use citations, otherwise I would have just consulted his citations and wrote a paper based on what I found there.
>>2268590
C'est la vie.
>>2268450
>Was violence immediately sought or did it only occur because other options were exhausted?
The normans trained for war not diplomacy
>>2268598
Not really. I'm assuming his professor won't be fine with just going by what one non-scholar says in a narrative of his own.
>>2268450
It's just some guy's blog, but he does tend to source his stuff pretty thoroughly, at least worth taking a look at what he has for getting at further sources.
http://www.angelfire.com/mb2/battle_hastings_1066/note1_35.html
>>2268614
sometimes mon ami you just have to forget about your professor
>>2268632
Well considering he wrote the thread in relation to a paper your french fuckery isn't really welcome here sir.
>>2268645
do you know why people call you burgers?
>>2268624
This guy at least gives you a good starting point OP. At lot of bloggers do take the time to research and present digestible pieces of history, even if they themselves aren't authorities.
>>2268450
Have some autism on the subject.
https://desuarchive.org/his/thread/1632513/#q1635798
>>2268685
Thanks for the autism. This is probably more fruitful and to the point than the text we read, or our class discussion really. Even if the essay turns out as drivel or shit history is a good place to come and get a fresh perspective.
>>2268685
ayy I remember that thread
>>2268797
There is no reference? Someone is looking for sources for a quick paper they are writing tonight and someone linked a past thread involving the subject. I don't think there is much to "get" here.
Normans weren't French.
>>2268867
No one said they were?
>>2268867
Normies more like it
David Horwath's 1066 seems pretty sympathetic to the English but I don't have any suggestions as to a good and proper Norman source that you could get your hands on ASAP.
>>2268867
Lmao how badly does your ass hurt right now?
>>2269516
None since I don't do anal. Can't say the same about your mother.
>>2269538
>a thousand years later, my ass is still bleeding
>>2268450
Harold Godwinson is an oath-breaking scoundrel who violated a solemn pledge placed over holy relics. The Normans did nothing wrong
>>2269558
Good, now source your words?
>>2268450
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FW4RKp23Z4M
if you want a quick but somewhat indepth look at the actual battle of hastings and some events leading up to it, I suggest you watch this video it's good to give you a basic idea
>>2269565
God his voice is comfy as fuck. Good newer source to get into things. You are right he gets into the weeds but it's relatively short in terms of what I'd expect from a history video. If only he cited some things for us who are curious.
>>2269576
yeah the narators voice is pretty comfy, and I really like the way he visualized his naration.
but beyond that it's basicly a detailed sneak peak.
>>2269587
Sounds a lot better than my professor and definitely gives a better diagram based break down of the way the military skirmish went down.
This guy could say girrrrtthh to me any day which is what I swear I just heard.
>>2269590
Everyone has his speciality, his is comfy military history.
>>2269560
Whatever you want anon
http://www.normaninvasion.info/harolds-pledge-to-duke-of-normandy.htm
http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/historic_figures/harold_ii_godwineson.shtml
http://mercedesrochelle.com/wordpress/?p=387
http://www.eyewitnesstohistory.com/bayeux.htm
http://www.britannia.com/history/monarchs/mon21.html
http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/british/normans/background_01.shtml
http://www.historylearningsite.co.uk/medieval-england/1066-2/
http://penelope.uchicago.edu/~grout/encyclopaedia_romana/britannia/anglo-saxon/hastings/anglonorman.html
>yfw Harold isn't even related to the King, a usurper, and is also burning in hell as we speak
Don't swear oaths over holy relics if you can't deliver
>>2269604
thanks t. Normanposter.
>>2269645
No problem anon. To stop the memeing for a minute, the Normans were deceptive in getting him to take the oath, and normally under the circumstances a coerced oath would not be permissible. However, an oath upon holy relics, coerced or not, meant all bets were off, which is why the Pope got on board with Duke William.
>>2269655
Thanks. Most of the people were shitposting about how Harold sucked or how much of a bastard William was. Like I said previously, I have a pretty solid pro Harold source I'm working with so I just needed one solid piece of Norman historical perspective. Since I'm in a hurry I think I'll fall back on the U Chicago link. From what I can recall most of their programs, history included, are GOAT tier.
>>2269852
Well I'm here because I am trying to educate myself on the matter.
>>2269879
Oh, I thought you were tried to educate yourself on the invasion specifically
Well, if you need education and why the Normans were French, know that:
-They were culturally French (spoke French, lived according to the French feudal system, adopted French religion, fought like the French and not like vikings)
-They were mostly French ethnically speaking too (as eight generations of interbreeding with the locals had occured since they arrived in France. Rollo's son was already 50% French through his mom, so William seven generations later would be around 80% French genetically)
>>2269904
Any reason then for the continued Norman identity instead of the emergence of a French one? I would at least think there would be a mixture of the two but the Frenchness of the Norms never really came up in my readings or our lectures.
>>2269944
>but the Frenchness of the Norms never really came up in my readings or our lectures.
Maybe you should stop getting your infos from buttdevasted brits then
Either that or it was the work of people who assumed everyone knows that Normans were French and thus didnt feel the need to mention it
But yeah, Normans were French
It's easily verifiable in their behavior, their names, the stuff they left behinf (such as the Bayeux Tapestry), the impact they left on England...
Only a huge effort of mental gymnastics and reaching can allow buttdevasted Lindybeige-tier Bongistanis to try and deny that obvious fact