View previous topic :: View next topic |
|
|
|
|
Ishmael wrote: | Hatty wrote: | Is it known for sure that there was a battle at Hastings |
I assure you. There was no Battle of Hastings. |
The Norman accounts of Hastings are eerily the same as that of their own accounts of Stamford Bridge. There are no credible English accounts of Stamford Bridge.
The whole idea of Harold rushing up and down the country is nonsense. Didn't happen. Total bollox.
The historians still believe Stamford Bridge happened...they base this on accounts in later Norwegian Sagas, eg the Heimskringla a Norwegian saga.
The Norman accounts of both Hastings and Stamford Bridge draw on this same heroic myth.
"the king whose name would ill-doers scare. The golden arrow wound not spare"
The problems of infantry against cavalry. etc.....
It's all based on the same saga/myth.
Two battles. Two King Harolds/Harald. Both losing shot by arrows. Hmm chances of this are???
And what about Gate Fulford? Three battles, two invasions? all featuring a Harold/Harald all in a few days, yer right........
and of course then we have Hereward
Harold/Harald/Hereward, sorry but they are all the same, got to be....
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hatty
Site Admin
In: Berkshire
|
|
|
|
The whole sorry saga is a mass of strangely familiar legendary characters. After Cnut died the kingdom was divided into three, seized by Harold Harefoot, then claimed by an Alfred who was blinded and died at Ely. Need one go on?
Harold was blinded in the left eye, the same sacrifice that was made by Woden in his quest to discover the secret of the runes. Godwinson, eh?
The body of the slain Harold was identified by Edith Swan-Neck, his concubine. To make sure the Hermetic reference was understood, he was resurrected as a hermit, at Canterbury or Dover, and finally buried at Waltham Abbey which is situated on the meridian.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hatty
Site Admin
In: Berkshire
|
|
|
|
In whose interest would it be to mythologise the Battle of Hastings? The Normans, presumably. They certainly weaved a successful story-line. It was even put about that they landed at Hastings on Michaelmas.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ishmael
In: Toronto
|
|
|
|
Hatty wrote: | In whose interest would it be to mythologise the Battle of Hastings? The Normans, presumably. They certainly weaved a successful story-line. It was even put about that they landed at Hastings on Michaelmas. |
What evidence is there that there were ever any Normans?
I say its all nonsense.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Too many Harolds.
Too many Harold G coins.
Thats the problem....
|
|
|
|
|
|
Grant
|
|
|
|
Hatty wrote
Harold was blinded in the left eye, the same sacrifice that was made by Woden in his quest to discover the secret of the runes. Godwinson, eh? |
Is the eye business generally accepted by historians? I thought it developed because a soldier in the Bayeux tapestry is shown with an arrow in his eye, but there is no reason to assume it was Harold.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
It is very rare for commanders to die in battles always has been.
If you lose your commander, you lose your command structure.
This idea that Alexander went dashing off with the Companion cavalry...hmm. The bastard was so heavily involved he lost 2 chargers, 3 by some accounts, Harold was knocked off his charger then shot in the eye.
None of this happened.
Still cant explain all the finds of Harold Rex Pax Ang coins. there are loads, google it, looking at the archaeology you would thought his reign longer than the Confessor.
Something wrong with the accepted chronology?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|