learning modern German being a English Speaking American was very easy. Looks like this battle brought over more than just chain mail, wine, and weapons.
English is Eastern Germanic, hence why the british isles became "english" and then brought it to america. The Dutch are who is to blame. Raiders, Banking Guru's, Slave Traders, War Mongers, and the list goes on. These are a very material people who understood the position of materials in terms of war. They just followed Roman suit.
I have to disagre with the time William became King of England, he didnt become King untill Christmas Day 1066. He may have won that battle but he had far from won the war. First he marched his army through southern England, crossing the Thames at Wallingford then headed for Berkhamsted where he took final surrender from Archbishop Ealdred, the Bishops of Worcester and Hereford, Earls Eadwin and Morcar, and the chief men of London, who swore allegiance to him, and offered him the crown.
kwl lots of help man im doin an essay on how war has changed over the course of time and i have used this as a source so youre in my bibleogra[hy, well done :)
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
Well as a Norman I stand with my forefathers and our great William (Willaume in Norman) but I do respect the Anglo-Dane Harold who of noble Danish and Anglo-Saxon blood. Two Normans castrated and cut Harold to peaces something that William was horrified by and he had these knights punished.
@Anquetil79: You do not sound like a tough grizzled old soldier but some kind of dandified Nancy boy, who is afraid of wars! You are indubitably no sea-dog but the sort of pasty landlubber I have always despised. I'll warrant, the most exciting thing that has happened to you limpid prawn in a whole year, was the day when you forgot to put sugar in your porridge!
I totally agree. As an Englishman we all remember brave King Harold. He was desperately unlucky during the battle. His men loved him and he would have been a great king had not William the 'bastard' cast his ambitious and greedy eyes on England. Harold was twice the man William was. William was an evil tyrant who effectively used England to as a means to further enrich himself. He cared nothing for it's people. His sons turned out to be much the same.
English didn't really exist anyway as we know it - they were Anglo-Saxons - effectively German settlers with Viking blood, who spoke a different language.
They didn't speak English - even Chaucerian English (later than 1066) is pretty challenging to read. They were Anglo-Saxons - very different from the English we now regard ourselves. Ironically, it was the Plantaganets who laid the foundations for the birth of the English state (Magna Carter etc) and its common law - and they were from FRENCH descendants!
No, that is not a source, that is just you repeating the same point again. Please tell me the source that shows the Saxons spoke or referred to their language as English? Either a book or an internet source is fine.
As I say, Chaucer's language (some years later) was nothing like present English - so Anglo-Saxon "English" would have been incomprehensible.
@219970 there are a few words you can recognise if you look up anglo-saxon translation or somthing. but i heard that england spoke tree languages (saxon-poor norman-rulers and latin-monks)until somone comprimised them all
@219970 English is a eastern germanic language, so it is possible that it took over as a dominate language as the normans defeated the anglo saxons who mainly spoke celtic/gallic/ and other local tongues. Also there is a bit of latin going on here on these isles considering juilas cesaer
learning modern German being a English Speaking American was very easy. Looks like this battle brought over more than just chain mail, wine, and weapons.
English is Eastern Germanic, hence why the british isles became "english" and then brought it to america. The Dutch are who is to blame. Raiders, Banking Guru's, Slave Traders, War Mongers, and the list goes on. These are a very material people who understood the position of materials in terms of war. They just followed Roman suit.
noblew357 1 year ago
what about the saxon rebelions? there were a few
Huscarl666 1 year ago
I have to disagre with the time William became King of England, he didnt become King untill Christmas Day 1066. He may have won that battle but he had far from won the war. First he marched his army through southern England, crossing the Thames at Wallingford then headed for Berkhamsted where he took final surrender from Archbishop Ealdred, the Bishops of Worcester and Hereford, Earls Eadwin and Morcar, and the chief men of London, who swore allegiance to him, and offered him the crown.
DibbersPage 1 year ago
kwl lots of help man im doin an essay on how war has changed over the course of time and i have used this as a source so youre in my bibleogra[hy, well done :)
chill579 1 year ago
great video, I'm currently learning about this battle 1066, and it helped a lot, thank you very much
100Manunited 1 year ago
I am honestly just on this vid cause my mum asked me what i was doin on u tube
Burningcheeseable 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Well as a Norman I stand with my forefathers and our great William (Willaume in Norman) but I do respect the Anglo-Dane Harold who of noble Danish and Anglo-Saxon blood. Two Normans castrated and cut Harold to peaces something that William was horrified by and he had these knights punished.
Anquetil79 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Anquetil79: You do not sound like a tough grizzled old soldier but some kind of dandified Nancy boy, who is afraid of wars! You are indubitably no sea-dog but the sort of pasty landlubber I have always despised. I'll warrant, the most exciting thing that has happened to you limpid prawn in a whole year, was the day when you forgot to put sugar in your porridge!
GreatGrumbledook 2 years ago
I have a lot more respect for Harold than William. Harold died like a warrior and soldier defending England.
While the Norman tyrant fell off his horse and later died of his injurys.
I will remember Harold's before William's.
24878281 3 years ago
I agree. Harold was also the first and last true King of England.
GRIDKEEPER 3 years ago 2
I totally agree. As an Englishman we all remember brave King Harold. He was desperately unlucky during the battle. His men loved him and he would have been a great king had not William the 'bastard' cast his ambitious and greedy eyes on England. Harold was twice the man William was. William was an evil tyrant who effectively used England to as a means to further enrich himself. He cared nothing for it's people. His sons turned out to be much the same.
starryian007 3 years ago 2
They weren't British, they were English, they were no Welsh or Scots in the army.
jackh4eva 3 years ago
English didn't really exist anyway as we know it - they were Anglo-Saxons - effectively German settlers with Viking blood, who spoke a different language.
219970 3 years ago 2
They called themselves English and referred to their language as English.
jackh4eva 3 years ago
Source for this?
They didn't speak English - even Chaucerian English (later than 1066) is pretty challenging to read. They were Anglo-Saxons - very different from the English we now regard ourselves. Ironically, it was the Plantaganets who laid the foundations for the birth of the English state (Magna Carter etc) and its common law - and they were from FRENCH descendants!
219970 3 years ago 3
The language they spoke was called Englisc by its speakers.
jackh4eva 3 years ago
No, that is not a source, that is just you repeating the same point again. Please tell me the source that shows the Saxons spoke or referred to their language as English? Either a book or an internet source is fine.
As I say, Chaucer's language (some years later) was nothing like present English - so Anglo-Saxon "English" would have been incomprehensible.
219970 3 years ago 2
very focused argument thank you all
ChristopherYnot 3 years ago
@219970 there are a few words you can recognise if you look up anglo-saxon translation or somthing. but i heard that england spoke tree languages (saxon-poor norman-rulers and latin-monks)until somone comprimised them all
(sorry if this is a load of bull')
Huscarl666 1 year ago
@219970 English is a eastern germanic language, so it is possible that it took over as a dominate language as the normans defeated the anglo saxons who mainly spoke celtic/gallic/ and other local tongues. Also there is a bit of latin going on here on these isles considering juilas cesaer
noblew357 1 year ago
very focused it's all there
chrisconil 3 years ago
History in the making! :)
soundation 3 years ago
nice!
0B0Eriec 3 years ago
Thank you for that comment it appreciated.
ChristopherYnot 3 years ago