Notice: This is the official website of the All Empires History Community (Reg. 10 Feb 2002)

  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Register Register  Login Login

Remembering King Harold II...

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  12>
Author
Huscarl View Drop Down
Housecarl
Housecarl
Avatar

Joined: 02-Mar-2008
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 36
  Quote Huscarl Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: Remembering King Harold II...
    Posted: 14-Oct-2008 at 07:35
Here's raising a glass of mead to the memory of this great warrior-king who had long served his country well as ambassador, general and earl, and after a ferocious all-day bloodbath in which he almost clutched yet another stunning victory, was struck down by a chance Norman arrow in battle this day in history!

Lest we forget...
Back to Top
Al Jassas View Drop Down
Arch Duke
Arch Duke
Avatar

Joined: 07-Aug-2007
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1810
  Quote Al Jassas Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 14-Oct-2008 at 15:55

Hello Huscarl

I first read about Hastings when I was 13 some 12 years ago and since then that story has always captivated me, it reminded me of parallel historical events in Arab history but that is something else. I always found it strange that such a story of a remarkable king haven't been displayed in motion picture. I think a biopic about him will be a huge success especially if historical accuracy was kept.

Al-Jassas

Back to Top
Huscarl View Drop Down
Housecarl
Housecarl
Avatar

Joined: 02-Mar-2008
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 36
  Quote Huscarl Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 14-Oct-2008 at 17:23
Hi Al-Jassas and thanks for your interest!

I'd like to hear about those 'parrallels' with the Arabic historical events.

There is actually a big film being made ("1066") which is in pre-production as we speak...

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1018103/

http://profile.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=user.viewprofile&friendid=202565145

http://blog.1066themovie.biz/2007/01/18/who-would-you-cast.aspx#AddComment



Back to Top
Alkibiades View Drop Down
Janissary
Janissary
Avatar

Joined: 09-Jul-2008
Location: New York
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 26
  Quote Alkibiades Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 14-Oct-2008 at 21:14
Really? I hadn't heard. That's very interesting...I always thought the Battle of Hastings, and what led up to it, would make a fascinating movie.
 
Who on earth could they cast for Harold? Come to think of it, who could they cast for William?
...sed sic sic sine fine feriati, et tecum iaceamus osculantes...
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest
Guest
  Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 15-Oct-2008 at 04:13

Source:
http://www.eppingforestdc.gov.uk/community/history/KingHarold.asp

A portrait of the King.

Thanks for the news. That does sound like a great topic for a movie. I wish there were more and more accurate historical movies made.

I think Liam Neeson could pull off the role.
Back to Top
Constantine XI View Drop Down
Suspended
Suspended

Suspended

Joined: 01-May-2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 5711
  Quote Constantine XI Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 15-Oct-2008 at 05:12
I wish we had mead, I might have to make do with botrytis instead - hey at least it contains honey.

When you think about the man, there is a lot to be said for him. He proved himself a very capable commander. He may have even decided on his own initiative to import some continental military and social institutions (e.g. more centralisation, encastellation) without England losing its more egaltarian flavour. But that topic belongs to Alternative History.
Back to Top
Reginmund View Drop Down
Arch Duke
Arch Duke


Joined: 08-May-2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1943
  Quote Reginmund Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 15-Oct-2008 at 08:04
Originally posted by es_bih


Source:
http://www.eppingforestdc.gov.uk/community/history/KingHarold.asp

A portrait of the King.

Thanks for the news. That does sound like a great topic for a movie. I wish there were more and more accurate historical movies made.

I think Liam Neeson could pull off the role.


Good suggestion. Or even better; Jean Claude van Damme, the martial arts Anglo-Saxon! Big%20smile

I was about to say that the portrait is pure fantasy and that only the clothing is correct while the hair and moustache does not reflect the contemporary fashion of clean shaving and close-cropped hair. Looking at the Bayeux tapestry however it seems Harold broke with fashion.

http://www.wordinfo.info/words/images/bayeuxtapestry-Harold-king.gif


Edited by Reginmund - 15-Oct-2008 at 08:06
Back to Top
Al Jassas View Drop Down
Arch Duke
Arch Duke
Avatar

Joined: 07-Aug-2007
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1810
  Quote Al Jassas Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 15-Oct-2008 at 15:12
Hello Huscarl
 
Well the parallel historical event most similar to what Harold's story is that of Abdullah ibn Al-Zubair who declared himself Caliph during the power vacuum that was left after Muawiyah II died without naming an heir.
 
This event happened almost 400 year before Harold's battle. Abdullah ibn Al-Zubair in 61 AH (680) was one of the most respected people in the Islamic world. A 60 year old veteran of the conquests, he was the grandson of the first caliph Abu-Bakr and the Prophet himself was married to his aunt. His father was deeply involved in politics of the first fitnah which killed him. After the massacre of Karbala the angry Abdullah supported by his brothers particularly Urwah and his half brother Musaab. To make things short all provinces announced alliagence to him and he formed a stable government except in Syria where the new Ummyad caliph Marwan ibn Al-Hakam was almost going to renounce his claim had it not been for powerful Ummayd princes who forced to battle the armies of ibn Al-Zubair and win against them in Marj Rahit. Marwan soon died and His son, the ambitious Abdul-Malik soon built himself a formidable army, took Egypt, North Africa and Iraq where Al-Hajjaj proved an excellent commander and where Musaab was murdered and his head sent to his brother Abdullah. By 73 AH he was all but defeated by Al-Hajjaj who now besieged Mecca. Everyone he trusted betreyed him even his own sons. He went to his mother now in her 90s and the oldest living companion of the prophet at that time to ask her permission to surrender. She threatened to disown him if he did and urged him despite being 73 years of age to fight to death and not be afraid of what they ummayads would do to him and he did fight and he died near the grand mosque and was crucified for three days only to be buried after Asma his mother and Abdullah ibn Umar, also one of the last of the companions of the prophet, demanded his body. Urwah was going to be killed by Al-Hajjaj but he was forbidden by Abdul-Malik because the two were best friends before politics divided them.
 
Al-Jassas
Back to Top
Huscarl View Drop Down
Housecarl
Housecarl
Avatar

Joined: 02-Mar-2008
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 36
  Quote Huscarl Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 15-Oct-2008 at 17:46
Al Jassas

Interesting parrallel and a bloody, tragic story. Thanks for that.

Reginmund

I think that only the Normans actually had shaved heads (the rear of their head and short-cropped front.). The English- as you correctly stated about Harold II, had long hair in the Scandinavian style, with "warrior's moustaches".

Some of the Bayeux tapestry detail is not intended to be literally represented- ie. some of the distant perspective overlaps foreground objects!
Back to Top
Reginmund View Drop Down
Arch Duke
Arch Duke


Joined: 08-May-2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1943
  Quote Reginmund Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 15-Oct-2008 at 18:06
Originally posted by Huscarl

I think that only the Normans actually had shaved heads (the rear of their head and short-cropped front.). The English- as you correctly stated about Harold II, had long hair in the Scandinavian style, with "warrior's moustaches".


I didn't mean shaved in the back, simply short cropped in the style you see on the tapestry, where the hair is long enough to cover their ears. And if the bayeux tapestry tells us they looked this way and there is no source to the contrary, well then there is little reason to believe they were longhaired and moustached. Btw. where do you have these Scandinavian "warrior moustaches" from? I've read a lot of Old Norse primary sources and I have run into long hair and beards but no concept of "warrior moustaches".
Back to Top
Alkibiades View Drop Down
Janissary
Janissary
Avatar

Joined: 09-Jul-2008
Location: New York
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 26
  Quote Alkibiades Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 15-Oct-2008 at 18:15

Quite right, Reg, Norman knights cropped their hair on the back of the head only (like the "mushroom" style you used to see on young guys here in the 1990s), and they were otherwise clean-shaven. This is quite visible in the Bayeux Tapestry, as you pointed out.

The Saxons did have long hair and moustaches, but I'm not familiar with the term "Sacandinavian warrior's moustaches." Does this come from current historical writing or from a visual source?

 

...sed sic sic sine fine feriati, et tecum iaceamus osculantes...
Back to Top
Huscarl View Drop Down
Housecarl
Housecarl
Avatar

Joined: 02-Mar-2008
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 36
  Quote Huscarl Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 15-Oct-2008 at 21:49
Not 'Scandinavian moustaches' but "warrior" moustaches. Long hair akin to the Scandinavians, maybe even from long before them.

I have read the moustache part in a (now forget) respected source not only about the ill-fated Leofgar, Bishop of Hereford (Harold's former chaplain) who fought the Welsh and was killed in 1055, but also seperately about Ansgar the Staller- Sheriff of London, who led the resistance against William as he arced London and approached the northern gate- at Ludgate Hill, very soon after Hastings after the senior men had already submitted.

These two men were both described as having 'warrior's moustaches'. Not made up.


Edited by Huscarl - 15-Oct-2008 at 21:52
Back to Top
C.C.Benjamin View Drop Down
Samurai
Samurai
Avatar

Joined: 16-May-2008
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 125
  Quote C.C.Benjamin Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 16-Oct-2008 at 07:02
Originally posted by Huscarl

Here's raising a glass of mead to the memory of this great warrior-king who had long served his country well as ambassador, general and earl, and after a ferocious all-day bloodbath in which he almost clutched yet another stunning victory, was struck down by a chance Norman arrow in battle this day in history!

Lest we forget...


At least the house of Plantagenet did him no dishonour in continuing the tradition of English warrior kings.

If it wasn't for William's success, we would never have had Longshanks or Richard the Lionheart.
Know thyself
Back to Top
Alkibiades View Drop Down
Janissary
Janissary
Avatar

Joined: 09-Jul-2008
Location: New York
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 26
  Quote Alkibiades Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 16-Oct-2008 at 13:30
Thank you, Huscurl, for explaining the "warrior moustaches"--interesting.
 
CCB, it's certainly true that the Plantagenet kings continued the tradition of warrior monarchs but they were, of course, descended from an Angevin duke and a former duchess of Poitou-queen of France. Richard Lionheart may have been an English king, but he spent precious little time in England.
...sed sic sic sine fine feriati, et tecum iaceamus osculantes...
Back to Top
Reginmund View Drop Down
Arch Duke
Arch Duke


Joined: 08-May-2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1943
  Quote Reginmund Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 16-Oct-2008 at 14:42
While the Normans and Angevins were kings and fiefholders of English lands, I wouldn't call them English. They did not see themselves as Anglo-Saxons but as a foreign elite ruling by right of conquest, who shared neither language nor political culture with their "native" subjects. Not until the later middle ages, with the increased polarization between England and France during the HYW, was the king and aristocracy anglicized. 

Unless I am much mistaken Edward I's son Edmund was the first prince since 1066 to carry a typically Anglo-Saxon name. Towards the end of the 14th century Richard II was downright resented for his francophile ways. The political climate of the HYW forced the ruling class to assimilate.
Back to Top
Alkibiades View Drop Down
Janissary
Janissary
Avatar

Joined: 09-Jul-2008
Location: New York
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 26
  Quote Alkibiades Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 16-Oct-2008 at 15:06
Good point Reginmund. The early Plantagenet kings lived completely apart from the culture of their English subjects. It took the pressure of prolonged war with France to turn the "hearts and minds" of rulers and aristocracy.
...sed sic sic sine fine feriati, et tecum iaceamus osculantes...
Back to Top
C.C.Benjamin View Drop Down
Samurai
Samurai
Avatar

Joined: 16-May-2008
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 125
  Quote C.C.Benjamin Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 16-Oct-2008 at 17:26
Originally posted by Alkibiades

Thank you, Huscurl, for explaining the "warrior moustaches"--interesting.
 
CCB, it's certainly true that the Plantagenet kings continued the tradition of warrior monarchs but they were, of course, descended from an Angevin duke and a former duchess of Poitou-queen of France. Richard Lionheart may have been an English king, but he spent precious little time in England.


I am, of course, fully aware of that, but thank you for the information.  There are doubtless other less well-informed readers. :)

This doesn't detract from the point that they were still not a disappointment to the tradition.
Know thyself
Back to Top
mazuk View Drop Down
Knight
Knight
Avatar

Joined: 12-May-2008
Location: England
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 88
  Quote mazuk Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 17-Oct-2008 at 05:04
Not sure if any of you guys have been to hastings battlesite but it seems awfully small for a battle of this scale? i just couldn't picture thousands of soldiers fighting on that field.
Back to Top
Reginmund View Drop Down
Arch Duke
Arch Duke


Joined: 08-May-2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1943
  Quote Reginmund Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 17-Oct-2008 at 07:44
Are they 100% certain it's the right field? These things very often aren't.
Back to Top
Huscarl View Drop Down
Housecarl
Housecarl
Avatar

Joined: 02-Mar-2008
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 36
  Quote Huscarl Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 17-Oct-2008 at 07:45
Originally posted by mazuk

Not sure if any of you guys have been to hastings battlesite but it seems awfully small for a battle of this scale? i just couldn't picture thousands of soldiers fighting on that field.


Some historians (McLynn et al)speculate that the battle itself wasn't actually fought where we think it was, but perhaps a nearby site.

No archaeological artefacts have been discovered at Senlac (Santlache) yet...
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  12>

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Bulletin Board Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 9.56a [Free Express Edition]
Copyright ©2001-2009 Web Wiz

This page was generated in 0.172 seconds.