William The Conqueror -- Did He Burn His Ships?
D. Spencer Hines
landing in England in 1066, ordered that his ships be burned so that the
thought of retreat to Normandy was not an option and that the willpower of
his troops would be steeled to think only of victory.
Can anyone document this story that indeed *all* the ships in the 'invasion
fleet' were burned on his orders?
Further, there is a story that Cortez did the same thing in Mexico "but
saved one ship to carry the gold back to Spain."
I recently heard an economist, repeat these stories --- with great bravado
and authority --- and I was skeptical that I was not getting the straight
and unvarnished truth.
Can anyone here put some flesh on these bones and hopefully cite a source
that might treat these matters?
Thank you.
D. Spencer Hines
Lux et Veritas
--
D. Spencer Hines --- William Jefferson Blythe III [Bill Clinton] President
of the United States --- Peccatoris Justificatio Absque Paenitentia, Legem
Destruit Moralem. "Clinton's an unusually good liar. Unusually good."
Senator Bob Kerrey [Democrat, Nebraska]
--
D. Spencer Hines --- William Jefferson Blythe III [Bill Clinton] President
of the United States --- Peccatoris Justificatio Absque Paenitentia, Legem
Destruit Moralem. "Clinton's an unusually good liar. Unusually good."
Senator Bob Kerrey [Democrat, Nebraska]
James Gifford
from "D. Spencer Hines" <shi...@worldnet.att.net> contains these words:
> There is a recurrent story that William The Conqueror [c. 1027-1087], upon
> landing in England in 1066, ordered that his ships be burned so that the
> thought of retreat to Normandy was not an option and that the willpower of
> his troops would be steeled to think only of victory.
> Can anyone document this story that indeed *all* the ships in the 'invasion
> fleet' were burned on his orders?
I've just looked at the fairly detailed account of this battle in
'Battles in Britain: 1066 - 1746' by William Seymour. There is no
mention of this incident. On the whole I think it unlikely. William
would still need his ships for re-supply even if he won the first
battle of a campaign of conquest. He wasn't to know that it would be
relatively easy going after Hastings. I also think it psychologically
wrong. Duke William seems to be to have been far to hard headed for
that sort of gesture.
--
James Gifford
Banff
Scotland
E-Mail jam...@zetnet.co.uk
gth...@azstarnet.com
"D. Spencer Hines" <shi...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>SNIP
> Further, there is a story that Cortez did the same thing in Mexico "but
> saved one ship to carry the gold back to Spain."
>
> I recently heard an economist, repeat these stories --- with great bravado
> and authority --- and I was skeptical that I was not getting the straight
> and unvarnished truth.
>
> Can anyone here put some flesh on these bones and hopefully cite a source
> that might treat these matters?
[moderator note - qutoed sig file deleted. Dave]
See Historia Verdadera de la Conquista de La Nueva España by Bernal Diaz del
Castillo Vol I p 175 et seq Capítulo LVIII. Herein Castillo recounts the
destruction of the ships. He was there so that is probably the best source.
-----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
http://www.dejanews.com/rg_mkgrp.xp Create Your Own Free Member Forum