You Wake Up and Find Yourself back In The 11th Century

[paranoid marvin]

Printing presses in the 11th Century wouldn't be much use as most people couldn't read! For those who could, books were a status symbol and a machine that could fire off cheap copies would not have gone down well.

Even when the printing press was available,people could read and books were more widely available there were a great deal of argument over the Bible being made available to the great unwashed. Those in authority didn't want ordinary folk reading it and deciding on their own interpretations - they wanted them to remain ignorant and be told what to believe in.

The problem you would have with any invention would firstly being able to get to speak to someone who was important enough to be able to do anything about your ideas. The second would be getting them to believe you're not crazy. And even if you did speak to someone, and did get them to listen to you , and they did go ahead and build the thing, the chances are that you would get none of the credit or any financial benefit.

The only way to get noticed, to have any kind of credulity or safety in the 11th Century is to be a warrior. Go back there with a platoon of Marines and a few thousand rounds of bullets and the world is yours.

 

[BigBadBob141]

Trouble with that is you soon run out of bullets, then what do you do?
You'd be better off with 18th century muskets, at least you can cast your own shot and make gunpowder.
You could even take some small bore cannons.
P.S. I'm sure I saw somewhere that, possible the Swedes, made cannons out of tree trunks, they were bound with iron rings to reinforce them.

 

[paranoid marvin]

4000 Englishmen died at Hastings, probably similar amounts of French at Agincourt and 1,000 of Richard's men at Bosworth. Back then it only took one decisive battle and a few thousand enemy deaths to conquer a country; a couple of machine-gun nests from the trenches of WWI would probably have won any major or minor skirmish up to the end of the 15th century.

 

[BAYLOR]

I doubt good dental hygiene was high on the list in that era imagine having a toothache. Not fun .

 

[River Boy]

Surely the task would be to tip the balance at the Battle of Hastings (a close-run thing) so that the Anglo-Saxon way of life isn't destroyed by the Normans.

 

[Ray McCarthy]

You think they wouldn't demand a rematch the next year?

 

[River Boy]

You think they wouldn't demand a rematch the next year?

You can't hang around to achieve a major overseas conquest, but the key thing was that Harold took all his brothers into the battle. Poor strategy left the country leaderless during the months it took William to secure London and hence the throne. Don't think he would have pulled it off with another major rival around, even the Romans needed to strike up a deal after a couple of battles.

 

[Brian G Turner]

I seem to recall reading somewhere that Harold held a strong defensive position on a hill, but William tricked them with a feint, causing the Saxons to charge down from their positions, where they were counter-attacked and defeated.

Interestingly enough, other sources tell me that a number of Saxon nobles who survived ended up in Constantinople, and became the backbone of the imperial Varangian Guard.

 

[Venusian Broon]

Interestingly enough, other sources tell me that a number of Saxon nobles who survived ended up in Constantinople, and became the backbone of the imperial Varangian Guard.

Who where then fought (and on a few occasions heavily defeated) by Norman knights from Sicily/Southern Italy as yet another aggressive Norman king tried to procure kingdoms and land he didn't have. Must have been 'oh no, not again...'

 

[River Boy]

I seem to recall reading somewhere that Harold held a strong defensive position on a hill, but William tricked them with a feint, causing the Saxons to charge down from their positions, where they were counter-attacked and defeated.

It wasn't a feint so much as dumb luck, hence the nickname 'William the Lucky *******'. Had the Saxons not broke ranks thinking the day was won history would have been quite different, seeing as William needed to secure the hill by sunset.

I think there was a lot more to it as well, in terms of it being very close, but been a while since I read up.

Has anyone in these threads mentioned the upcoming dig to test a piece of folklore on Harold's survival?: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-sussex-29612656 Will be one for the folklorists like me if it turns out to be true - it's a very obscure piece of folklore saying he survived, compared to the amount of folkloric evidence for Robin Hood or Lady Godiva, for example.

 

[Venusian Broon]

Was he called 'Lucky'? Never heard that before, do you have a source? It seems such a modern usage of the term! He definitely was given the title William the ******* by non-Norman sources, no doubt eager to point out his illegitimate birth and therefore to cast aspersions on his noble roots. I guess!

 

[River Boy]

Was he called 'Lucky'? Never heard that before, do you have a source? It seems such a modern usage of the term! He definitely was given the title William the ******* by non-Norman sources, no doubt eager to point out his illegitimate birth and therefore to cast aspersions on his noble roots. I guess!

Frank McLynn in 'The Year of Three Battles' does (had a quick skim through but haven't found page ref yet), though you have me wondering now if it was from a genuine source or if the nickname was the writer's suggestion.

I thought maybe 'The English Resistance' by Peter Rex too, but can't find my copy.

 

[Venusian Broon]

Frank McLynn in 'The Year of Three Battles' does (had a quick skim through but haven't found page ref yet), though you have me wondering now if it was from a genuine source or if the nickname was the writer's suggestion.

I thought maybe 'The English Resistance' by Peter Rex too, but can't find my copy.

Just mildly curious, so don't go out of your way to hunt it down

Anglo-Saxon English was a pretty 'earthy' language I believe, so they may well have given him that sort of title!

 

[BAYLOR]

Just mildly curious, so don't go out of your way to hunt it down

Anglo-Saxon English was a pretty 'earthy' language I believe, so they may well have given him that sort of title!

I seem to recall reading that Anglo Saxon was pretty much a germanic language before the coming of William the Conqueror. The Norman Conquest add words and expressions to Anglo Saxon english over time.

When william took over he pretty much disenfranchised the Anglo Saxon nobility of their lands , titles and wealth because they sided with Harold . Had the Anglo Saxon nobility sided with William would he still disenfranchised them?

 

[Teresa Edgerton]

In all likelihood you would be seen as a foreign spy or witch and hung, but before that the first thing you ate or drank would probably kill you.

I've thought about this thread several times since it was first posted, and that is the same conclusion I arrived at every time.

I just can't imagine any way that being transported to the 11th century could be anything but unmitigated disaster. A quick and painless death (and the sooner the better) would probably be the best scenario.

Brian, the Willis book is something you might appreciate because of your own research, but not really useful as research material itself (except in the unlikely event that you didn't already know that the plague killed a lot of people).

 

[River Boy]

When william took over he pretty much disenfranchised the Anglo Saxon nobility of their lands , titles and wealth because they sided with Harold . Had the Anglo Saxon nobility sided with William would he still disenfranchised them?

Don't think that would have mattered as the key complication was that William had promised the Norman nobility lands in England so they would join him in the conquest.

I think I'm right in saying that England was considered the 'Greatest Realm in Christendom' at the time, as it was before rival European nations like France and Spain had formed, so it was quite the prize. Also I get the impression that a lot of people overlook the fact that William was only a Duke in what is now part of France, in order to characterise in an English versus French context. William was head of a warrior people of Scandinavian background who had settled in part of what we now call France but wanted a greater realm, I don't think he gave a damn about relations with the Anglo Saxons.

 

[Ray McCarthy]

Had the Anglo Saxon nobility sided with William would he still disenfranchised them?

Yes.
Because he needed to reward his Nobles.
(the Normans were of course not proper French/Franks but originally Vikings?)

 

[BAYLOR]

Yes.
Because he needed to reward his Nobles.
(the Normans were of course not proper French/Franks but originally Vikings?)

So The Anglo saxon Nobility was trapped between a rock and a hard place no matter what they did.

If Harold Godwinson had been able to rest his army before Hastings , he might have won.

 

[Vertigo]

Which he could have done. He should have stayed in London to rest and consolidate his army. All of William's troops were already landed so Harold would have lost little by delaying and would have gained much. I believe he was so advised but ignored it.

 

[BAYLOR]

Which he could have done. He should have stayed in London to rest and consolidate his army. All of William's troops were already landed so Harold would have lost little by delaying and would have gained much. I believe he was so advised but ignored it.

End result , he lost the throne and his life. Foolish man .

Emperor Valens at Adrianople in 378 AD made a similar mistake against the Goths, same result.