The Bayeux Tapestry?

ICBM

Bridgehouse said:

I'm getting pedantic now, specially as a history graduate. However, my reply was in response to the suggestion that instant death only happened when modern warfare was introduced.

The reality is that all soldiers on the battlefield in 1066 were either offering their feudal duty or mercenaries. 

You went into battle with what you could afford - you had to acquire all your own kit. Some would have afforded chain mail, but for a low ranking archer, it would have been a leather jerkin at best. The neck would have been totally exposed. 

There is archeological evidence of early mediaeval battles (and late Middle Ages battles) of plenty of clean decapitations - most likely fast moving axe or swords men on horseback travelling at speed and timing a swing to hit said soldier from behind.

Are you sure that wasn't execution of prisoners afterwards?

I will accept that in some circumstances death may have been pretty instantaneous - I'd imagine a warhammer to the head would have been too, at least without a helmet - but for the vast majority it was unlikely to be, even without armour.

I don't have any doubt that a fully-armoured (by the standards of the day) aristocrat like King Harold would have taken some effort to kill, and death would be unlikely to be quick.

the_twin

thecolourbox said:

the_twin said:

He wasn't called William the Bastard for nothing.

I'd suspect that was his parentage wasn't it?

The story about his mother is worth reading, even if it may not be entirely true. 

Clarky

Bridgehouse said:

ICBM said:

Bridgehouse said:

Full armour in 1066 eh? 

Nope.

No, but a chain-mail hooded shirt (can’t remember what it’s called but that’s the basic design) and a helmet. Highly unlikely you’d be able to cut through that in one go, even with an axe.

I'm getting pedantic now, specially as a history graduate. However, my reply was in response to the suggestion that instant death only happened when modern warfare was introduced.

The reality is that all soldiers on the battlefield in 1066 were either offering their feudal duty or mercenaries. 

You went into battle with what you could afford - you had to acquire all your own kit. Some would have afforded chain mail, but for a low ranking archer, it would have been a leather jerkin at best. The neck would have been totally exposed. 

There is archeological evidence of early mediaeval battles (and late Middle Ages battles) of plenty of clean decapitations - most likely fast moving axe or swords men on horseback travelling at speed and timing a swing to hit said soldier from behind. 

Although we could argue over "instantaneous" if you like Does a few seconds to blink count or are we talking nuclear-blast-instant-nanosecond-turns you to dust instant?

look up the Housecarls.. and if memory serves, their weapon of choice was a the Daneaxe..

Carew

Bridgehouse said:

I'm getting pedantic now, specially as a history graduate. However, my reply was in response to the suggestion that instant death only happened when modern warfare was introduced.

The reality is that all soldiers on the battlefield in 1066 were either offering their feudal duty or mercenaries.

not true,  that may apply to the Norman army, but not the English.

Phil_aka_Pip

Pronunciation. I heard a lot of BBC presenters saying it as Bye-yoh but I'm sure that's wrong. To be Bye-yoh it would have to be spelt Bayeaux. I think it should be (as I was taught when a kid) Bye-yerh.

Anyone else have an opinion?

57Deluxe

The French can stick their shitty moth-eaten bit of knitting right up their arses... I'll stick with the Bow Street Tapestry thanks.

not_the_dj

Phil_aka_Pip said:

Pronunciation. I heard a lot of BBC presenters saying it as Bye-yoh but I'm sure that's wrong. To be Bye-yoh it would have to be spelt Bayeaux. I think it should be (as I was taught when a kid) Bye-yerh.

Anyone else have an opinion?

https://youtu.be/3S-I89XmxqI

Phil_aka_Pip

57Deluxe said:

The French can stick their shitty moth-eaten bit of knitting right up their arses...

If they think that letting us have it for a few weeks is sufficient inducement to pay them more money to secure their port AND take more migrants off their hands.

Carew

I say we keep it. It's more to English history than French.

thermionic

BREAKING NEWS: The Bayeux Tapestry will spend 6 months in Wales during its loan to the UK from France.

A spokesman for the National Museum of Wales said “We haven’t decided yet where we’re going to display it. It’ll either be Bayeux, or by there.”

Carew

i say that when France loan it over that we keep it.   it's more important to English history than French history.  It belongs to us more than them.  Let's repatriate it.  Goodwill reparations for WW2 anyway.

Is this loan gonna be the real proper one or an old copy anyway?   ppl have been fooled before thinking they were seeing the real thing.

Carew

I say that when they loan it to us that we keep it.  It's more important to English history than French. 
Anyway, goodwill re: our help in WW2.

Will it definitely be the real proper one or some old copy?   cos ppl have been fooled before thinking they were seeing the real thing.

Carew

test

Phil_aka_Pip

@not_the_dj so both the BBC and I are wrong!

Gassage

My mum was, ahem, Chair of the Embroiderer's Guild. A few yrs back, she went over to attend a conference on its ongoing maintainance. It's all very serious stuff!

ChuckManual

To celebrate the 950th anniversary of the battle, the good townsfolk (just the WI, actually) of Battle decided to create a new panel for it - a sequel, as it were.  I was delivering some stuff to the library (where it was being made) at the time and got collared by one of the old dears in charge - and so, should you ever see it, you can marvel at the bit of road I stitched! 

RandallFlagg

“I wouldn't wipe a donkey's arse with it love. What a load of old shit”

boogieman

Carew said:

I say that when they loan it to us that we keep it.  It's more important to English history than French. 
Anyway, goodwill re: our help in WW2.

Will it definitely be the real proper one or some old copy?   cos ppl have been fooled before thinking they were seeing the real thing.

And maybe if we keep it then we can give back all the ancient Egyptian stuff and the Elgin marbles we stole. It could turn in a global version of Swap Shop

Phil_aka_Pip

All this old stuff is good, it ought to be preserved but while it in our country we have to pay for its preservation and security. Unless we can show that inbound tourism generates more income than the cost of the preservation and security, why don't we give stuff back? Or is it that we think the original owners care a lot less about it than we do so this stuff is better off in our hands?

boogieman

Phil_aka_Pip said:

All this old stuff is good, it ought to be preserved but while it in our country we have to pay for its preservation and security. Unless we can show that inbound tourism generates more income than the cost of the preservation and security, why don't we give stuff back? Or is it that we think the original owners care a lot less about it than we do so this stuff is better off in our hands?

The argument always trotted out about keeping the Elgin Marbles was the huge amount of traffic pollution in Athens. I think it’s much better nowadays, probably on a par with London anyway. Can’t see why we’re hanging onto them tbh.