950 years ago today England and the world changed

a reply to: Cobaltic1978

When you do give us a bell we can go and get a pint
My company has a building near Leeds and Kirkstall abbey iz just around the corner it is all on ruins but so cool.

a reply to: Cobaltic1978
Have you researched the question in the way they did (in golf-club bars, etc)?

originally posted by: Cobaltic1978

originally posted by: DISRAELI
Here is the judgement of "1066 and all that" (Sellars and Yeatman).

When William the Conqueror landed he lay down on the beach and swallowed two mouthfuls of sand. This was his first conquering action and was in the South; later he ravaged the North as well. The Norman Conquest was a Good Thing, as from this time onwards England stopped being conquered and thus was able to become top nation.

They cite 1066 as one of the only two dates that Englishmen can remember (this probably needs to be updated as "the only one").

Wrong.

06/06/44.

1666 - TGFoL .......... just noticed both end in 66 ....... whats going to happen in 2066? heh

a reply to: TheKnightofDoom

For sure maybe 3 or 4.

originally posted by: corblimeyguvnor

originally posted by: Cobaltic1978

originally posted by: DISRAELI
Here is the judgement of "1066 and all that" (Sellars and Yeatman).

When William the Conqueror landed he lay down on the beach and swallowed two mouthfuls of sand. This was his first conquering action and was in the South; later he ravaged the North as well. The Norman Conquest was a Good Thing, as from this time onwards England stopped being conquered and thus was able to become top nation.

They cite 1066 as one of the only two dates that Englishmen can remember (this probably needs to be updated as "the only one").

Wrong.

06/06/44.

1666 - TGFoL .......... just noticed both end in 66 ....... whats going to happen in 2066? heh

I was born in 1970, so I really couldn't care less what happens.

a reply to: Cobaltic1978

Or ten btw I'm taking a service user on holiday glamping in North Yorkshire next week at camp katur...It is awesome if you want a break check it out.

a reply to: corblimeyguvnor

now we get invaded on a daily basis through BS politics and policies, along with the willingness to be PC

Yes, I'm glad you added that little detail.

originally posted by: Cobaltic1978

originally posted by: corblimeyguvnor

originally posted by: Cobaltic1978

originally posted by: DISRAELI
Here is the judgement of "1066 and all that" (Sellars and Yeatman).

When William the Conqueror landed he lay down on the beach and swallowed two mouthfuls of sand. This was his first conquering action and was in the South; later he ravaged the North as well. The Norman Conquest was a Good Thing, as from this time onwards England stopped being conquered and thus was able to become top nation.

They cite 1066 as one of the only two dates that Englishmen can remember (this probably needs to be updated as "the only one").

Wrong.

06/06/44.

1666 - TGFoL .......... just noticed both end in 66 ....... whats going to happen in 2066? heh

I was born in 1970, so I really couldn't care less what happens.

I just heard a great St Jame's park ROAR!!!! wooooohooooooo .........the correct "couldn't care less" instead of the now used too "could care less" from our American cousins

Could care less, if i am mistaken means, you ACTUALLY could care less, our saying means ........ the bottom of the pile, couldn't care less

Am i mistaken?

originally posted by: corblimeyguvnor
a reply to: CJCrawley

AND, this was the LAST time these shores were successfully invaded, no one since 1066 has managed it, quite a record, nearly 1000 years without invasion / enemy footfall on these green a pleasant lands.

IN SAYING THAT ....... that was then, this is now ....... now we get invaded on a daily basis through BS politics and policies, along with the willingness to be PC and conform to the norm of the EU, even though we decided to leave the experiment

AND .... oh never mind, i'm rambling

I agree with everything in the second paragraph but history has brushed over the fact that several royal french army's invaded or were invited in after 1066, one occasion was to place a king of there choosing on the throne of england and of course the same with a later dutch military army, not really an invasion but it all depend's on your perspective.

Now this is a gaming site but the first comment sum's it up perfectly.
www.twcenter.net...

originally posted by: Maxatoria
Wouldn't that mean we can blame the French in some way for all the stuff that happened since?

Eggy bread, that's up there, and as Labtech has put - the bowl haircut, although it does mean I get to laugh at picture of photos of my other half and her sister when they were kids with said hairstyle (given to them by their father) when they were children.

a reply to: Cobaltic1978

You've seen that sketch about Yorkshire by Hale and Pace right?
Couldn't help but think of that when I read your post, it's kinda true though still lol

I have to say it's not been the same since the Normans invaded, but it was better yet in the Celtic times, ah those were the days...

a reply to: LABTECH767

In that case, we are still being invaded

Yeah i'll give you Fishguard in 1797, although that only involved Wales

Of course, the Normans weren't really French, either.
They were the descendents of the norse invaders that took over that part of France.

originally posted by: corblimeyguvnor

originally posted by: Cobaltic1978

originally posted by: corblimeyguvnor

originally posted by: Cobaltic1978

originally posted by: DISRAELI
Here is the judgement of "1066 and all that" (Sellars and Yeatman).

When William the Conqueror landed he lay down on the beach and swallowed two mouthfuls of sand. This was his first conquering action and was in the South; later he ravaged the North as well. The Norman Conquest was a Good Thing, as from this time onwards England stopped being conquered and thus was able to become top nation.

They cite 1066 as one of the only two dates that Englishmen can remember (this probably needs to be updated as "the only one").

Wrong.

06/06/44.

1666 - TGFoL .......... just noticed both end in 66 ....... whats going to happen in 2066? heh

I was born in 1970, so I really couldn't care less what happens.

I just heard a great St Jame's park ROAR!!!! wooooohooooooo .........the correct "couldn't care less" instead of the now used too "could care less" from our American cousins

Could care less, if i am mistaken means, you ACTUALLY could care less, our saying means ........ the bottom of the pile, couldn't care less

Am i mistaken?

You are not mistaken at all, and as an English man who works regularly with Americans it's the one phrase over any other that I have learnt not to ask them what they think they actually mean when they say it.

HUZZA...(?)

a reply to: SprocketUK

Absolutely true, Norman come's of course from men of the north but the so called norman invasion was though led by norman's also bulked out by French mercenary's offered booty by William to join his army as well as many classed as Vassal's whom were forced to join it so it was really a Franco Norman invasion in that case though the blood of the many that died as a result could be argued to be strictly upon the Norman's hand's.

And as alldaylong - correctly - point's out the Saxon's were a tired army, many men were walking wounded even before the battle and as Cobaltic pointed out it was untried and untested farm hand's that had bulked out the Saxon army as replacement soldiers that lacked the discipline to keep there line and made the mistake of pursuing a retreating group of Norman French foot soldiers but in doing so opened up there position to the Norman cavalry with devastating result's otherwise it is likely that the Norman's would have been driven off and lost the battle had this not happened.

Of course much of our knowledge may be wrong as it is based on the victor's tales and the bayou tapestry so whom really know's what really happened there?.

originally posted by: LABTECH767
Of course much of our knowledge may be wrong as it is based on the victor's tales and the bayou tapestry so whom really know's what really happened there?.

There's also an account in the Anglo-Saxon Chronicles. Written in Anglo-Saxon.

a reply to: TheKnightofDoom

No people are wholly good, or wholly bad. That is a lesson we somehow forget over and over, and over again.

originally posted by: cavtrooper7
HUZZA...(?)

A Posh Hurrah .......... something like what Boris Johnson would use .... or the working class taking the piss out of the middle class / upper class

Yes, we still have class systems in the UK

originally posted by: corblimeyguvnor

originally posted by: Cobaltic1978

originally posted by: corblimeyguvnor

originally posted by: Cobaltic1978

originally posted by: DISRAELI
Here is the judgement of "1066 and all that" (Sellars and Yeatman).

When William the Conqueror landed he lay down on the beach and swallowed two mouthfuls of sand. This was his first conquering action and was in the South; later he ravaged the North as well. The Norman Conquest was a Good Thing, as from this time onwards England stopped being conquered and thus was able to become top nation.

They cite 1066 as one of the only two dates that Englishmen can remember (this probably needs to be updated as "the only one").

Wrong.

06/06/44.

1666 - TGFoL .......... just noticed both end in 66 ....... whats going to happen in 2066? heh

I was born in 1970, so I really couldn't care less what happens.

I just heard a great St Jame's park ROAR!!!! wooooohooooooo .........the correct "couldn't care less" instead of the now used too "could care less" from our American cousins

Could care less, if i am mistaken means, you ACTUALLY could care less, our saying means ........ the bottom of the pile, couldn't care less

Am i mistaken?

Yes, it's the correct way in which to say and write it.

Could care less, does that in fact mean they are non plussed by the whole experience, but it could have been worse.