1066 - Burial of Earl Tostig
Michael W Cook
According to William of Malmesbury's 'Gesta Regum' (written around 1125)
Tostig's body was recognised on the battlefield at Stamford Bridge by a wart
between the shoulder blades. It was then taken to York where he was buried.
In the Minster ?
As far as I'm aware, no other Anglo/Norman Chronicler mentions what happened
to his body after the battle.
Any other offers, possibly from Scandinavia ?
Cheers
Michael
Michael W Cook
Castles Abbeys and Medieval Buildings
http://www.castles-abbeys.co.uk
--
Paul J Gans
>According to William of Malmesbury's 'Gesta Regum' (written around 1125)
>Tostig's body was recognised on the battlefield at Stamford Bridge by a wart
>between the shoulder blades. It was then taken to York where he was buried.
>In the Minster ?
>As far as I'm aware, no other Anglo/Norman Chronicler mentions what happened
>to his body after the battle.
>Any other offers, possibly from Scandinavia ?
The curious thing is that the face must have been rather
mutilated. But then, many medieval wounds were to the face.
If it was covered and protected, then the person couldn't
see very well. And if it wasn't (and the style at the time
was against it), then...
But I'm sure that the Norwegians had no love for Tostig. He
did not deliver the promised uprising. And he was not important
enough to move very far. But he *was* the King's brother, so
a burial in York is likely. But I'd think not in the Minster
because he died a rebel.
That's just my uneducated guess.
---- Paul J. Gans
Tron Furu
Odd parallell between the two 1066 battles, undecided until the foot breaks
rank to pursue seemingly non-aggressive cavalry.
T
"Michael W Cook" <mwc...@btconnect.com> skrev i melding
news:BB9DFC6F.10333%mwc...@btconnect.com...
Tron Furu
"Tron Furu" <tron...@frisurf.no> skrev i melding
news:SxZdb.33611$Hb.5...@news4.e.nsc.no...
> Nothing in the Heimskringla.
>
> Odd parallell between the two 1066 battles, undecided until the foot
breaks
> rank to pursue seemingly non-aggressive cavalry.
Hrm. Sorry. Footnote says Snorre mixed up the battles .
T
Paul J Gans
>Nothing in the Heimskringla.
>Odd parallell between the two 1066 battles, undecided until the foot breaks
>rank to pursue seemingly non-aggressive cavalry.
It has been suggested that the record we have of the northern
battle (which is late) is based on confusion with Hastings.
But in any event, battles involving shield-walls often ended
in just that way. Which is why the feigned retreat existed
and was trained for.
---- Paul J. Gans
Paul J Gans
>T
Possibly. The point is argued.
---- Paul J. Gans
Tron Furu
"Paul J Gans" <ga...@panix.com> skrev i melding
news:bl9pif$q5a$4...@reader2.panix.com...
Which makes hindsight so tempting: Harold should have known better ...
Or trained against it. Or ...
T
Bryn Fraser
<tron...@frisurf.no> writes
>Nothing in the Heimskringla.
>
>Odd parallell between the two 1066 battles, undecided until the foot breaks
>rank to pursue seemingly non-aggressive cavalry.
And Harald H's death wound... An arrow in the throat... Well close
enough to his eye...
>
>T
>"Michael W Cook" <mwc...@btconnect.com> skrev i melding
>news:BB9DFC6F.10333%mwc...@btconnect.com...
>>
>> According to William of Malmesbury's 'Gesta Regum' (written around 1125)
>> Tostig's body was recognised on the battlefield at Stamford Bridge by a
>wart
>> between the shoulder blades. It was then taken to York where he was
>buried.
>>
>> In the Minster ?
>>
>> As far as I'm aware, no other Anglo/Norman Chronicler mentions what
>happened
>> to his body after the battle.
>>
>> Any other offers, possibly from Scandinavia ?
>>
>> Cheers
>>
>> Michael
>>
>> Michael W Cook
>>
>> Castles Abbeys and Medieval Buildings
>> http://www.castles-abbeys.co.uk
>> --
>>
>>
>
>
--
Bryn Fraser
"I did not have sexual relations with that woman!" Bill Clinton
The Good Old Days, Days of Innocence...
Bryn Fraser
Tron Furu
"Thur" <a@spamless.z> skrev i melding
news:Vl%db.2500$RU4....@newsfep4-glfd.server.ntli.net...
> x-no-archive: yes
> > >Odd parallel between the two 1066 battles,
> >> undecided until the foot breaks
> > >rank to pursue seemingly non-aggressive cavalry.
> > And Harald H's death wound... An arrow in the throat...
> >> Well close > enough to his eye...
>
> which may well have first been sung or related as
> poetry, had gained a certain poetic licence?
> That sometimes myths were mixed up, making nonsense
> of history in this period?
> Some of the stuff I read recently, makes me think this.
> Thur
>
Depends on what you mean by "tales from this era". Is the "tale" the events
at the battle of Stamford, or e.g. the saga of Harald Haardraade? They are a
few generations apart.
It's like somebody writing a paper on the history of the American Civil war
without literary support (although supported by "old televison shows, which,
old folks say, if you know how to understand them, contain the most and the
best truth").
T
Vaughan Sanders
"Michael W Cook" <mwc...@btconnect.com> wrote in message
news:BB9DFC6F.10333%mwc...@btconnect.com...
Don't know of any, Hardrada's body was returned to Scandinavia according
to the saga's.
103. OF KING HARALD SIGURDSON.
One year after King Harald's fall his body was transported from
England north to Nidaros, and was buried in Mary church, which he
had built. It was a common observation that King Harald
distinguished himself above all other men by wisdom and resources
of mind; whether he had to take a resolution suddenly for himself
and others, or after long deliberation. He was, also, above all
other men, bold, brave, and lucky, until his dying day, as above
related; and bravery is half victory. So says Thiodolf: --
"Harald, who till his dying day
Came off the best in many a fray,
Had one good rule in battle-plain,
In Seeland and elsewhere, to gain --
That, be his foes' strength more or less,
Courage is always half success."
Jamie
Michael W Cook
wrote on 29/9/03 5:33 pm:
> But I'd think not in the Minster because he died a rebel.
Interesting theory, which could well be correct.
Harold had a good relationship with Eadred, archbishop of York, so I suppose
Tostig wouldn't have found favour there for burial. He was also with
Hardrada, who wouldn't have been the most popular guy in York in the Autumn
of 1066.
Does anyone know if York Minister has any claim or documents on his body ?
Paul J Gans
What was there to train? Harold evidently did know better.
It is thought possible that his two brothers died while
trying to stop it. Harold's first army was still mostly
in the North. What he had at Hastings was the regional
fyrd. Since the Saxons seem not to have used cavalry in
their wars (nor did the Welsh or the Norwegians or Danes)
there was nothing to train for.
---- Paul J. Gans
Michael W Cook
wrote on 29/9/03 6:19 pm:
>> In alt.history.british Tron Furu <tron...@frisurf.no> wrote:
>> Nothing in the Heimskringla.
Thanks, Tron.
>> Odd parallell between the two 1066 battles, undecided until the foot breaks
>> rank to pursue seemingly non-aggressive cavalry.
Correction seen to this, just as I was about to disagree ;-)
> It has been suggested that the record we have of the northern
> battle (which is late) is based on confusion with Hastings.
Who proposes this, Paul ?
> But in any event, battles involving shield-walls often ended
> in just that way.
Agreed.
>Which is why the feigned retreat existed and was trained for.
That's arguable.
Bryn Fraser
<a@spamless.z> writes
>x-no-archive: yes
>> >Odd parallel between the two 1066 battles,
>>> undecided until the foot breaks
>> >rank to pursue seemingly non-aggressive cavalry.
>> And Harald H's death wound... An arrow in the throat...
>>> Well close > enough to his eye...
>
>which may well have first been sung or related as
>poetry, had gained a certain poetic licence?
>That sometimes myths were mixed up, making nonsense
>of history in this period?
>Some of the stuff I read recently, makes me think this.
>Thur
I think they were bound to pick up themes and elements from other
stories. Particularly given an oral tradition..
>
>
>"Bryn Fraser" <br...@finhall.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
>news:efp70eFGTHe$Ew...@finhall.demon.co.uk...
Tron Furu
Betcha hindsight could overcome any obstacle ...
T
Tron Furu
"Bryn Fraser" <br...@finhall.demon.co.uk> skrev i melding
news:WPv5Q$FfTHe$Ew...@finhall.demon.co.uk...
> In message <CDZdb.33617$Hb.5...@news4.e.nsc.no>, Tron Furu
> <tron...@frisurf.no> writes
> >
> >"Tron Furu" <tron...@frisurf.no> skrev i melding
> >news:SxZdb.33611$Hb.5...@news4.e.nsc.no...
> >> Nothing in the Heimskringla.
> >>
> >> Odd parallell between the two 1066 battles, undecided until the foot
> >breaks
> >> rank to pursue seemingly non-aggressive cavalry.
> >
> >
> >Hrm. Sorry. Footnote says Snorre mixed up the battles .
> >
> >T
>
> Oh dammit...
OK, OK. Mixed up the account of the battles.
T
Tron Furu
> in article bl9pif$q5a$4...@reader2.panix.com, Paul J Gans at ga...@panix.com
> wrote on 29/9/03 6:19 pm:
>
> >> In alt.history.british Tron Furu <tron...@frisurf.no> wrote:
>
> >> Nothing in the Heimskringla.
>
> Thanks, Tron.
And nothing in Theodricus the Monk.
T
Paul J Gans
>in article bl9pif$q5a$4...@reader2.panix.com, Paul J Gans at ga...@panix.com
>wrote on 29/9/03 6:19 pm:
>>> In alt.history.british Tron Furu <tron...@frisurf.no> wrote:
>>> Nothing in the Heimskringla.
>Thanks, Tron.
>>> Odd parallell between the two 1066 battles, undecided until the foot breaks
>>> rank to pursue seemingly non-aggressive cavalry.
>Correction seen to this, just as I was about to disagree ;-)
>
>> It has been suggested that the record we have of the northern
>> battle (which is late) is based on confusion with Hastings.
>Who proposes this, Paul ?
DeVries in his book on the Norwegian invasion of England
in 1066. But the observation has been made before.
>
>> But in any event, battles involving shield-walls often ended
>> in just that way.
>Agreed.
>>Which is why the feigned retreat existed and was trained for.
>That's arguable.
It was certainly trained for among the Normans and the
French. Bachrach has given a number of citations of this
by them. It was still hard to resist. You are tired, you
are worn down, and finally the enemy seems to be breaking.
You *WANT* to believe it. It takes a strong person to
resist.
--- Paul J. Gans
Tron Furu
> >Who proposes this, Paul ?
>
> DeVries in his book on the Norwegian invasion of England
> in 1066. But the observation has been made before.
My Heimskringla notes this, a 1900 reprint of the 1899 G. Storm translation.
T
Tony Jebson
> According to William of Malmesbury's 'Gesta Regum'
> (written around 1125) Tostig's body was recognised
> on the battlefield at Stamford Bridge by a wart
> between the shoulder blades. It was then taken to York
> where he was buried.
>
> In the Minster ?
>
> As far as I'm aware, no other Anglo/Norman Chronicler
> mentions what happened to his body after the battle.
I don't remember anything. I'll have a poke around
though.
--- Tony Jebson
Martin Reboul
Paul J Gans wrote ...
> Michael W Cook wrote:
>
> >According to William of Malmesbury's 'Gesta Regum' (written around 1125)
> >Tostig's body was recognised on the battlefield at Stamford Bridge by a
wart
> >between the shoulder blades. It was then taken to York where he was
buried.
>
> >In the Minster ?
>
> >As far as I'm aware, no other Anglo/Norman Chronicler mentions what
happened
> >to his body after the battle.
>
> >Any other offers, possibly from Scandinavia ?
>
> The curious thing is that the face must have been rather
> mutilated. But then, many medieval wounds were to the face.
> If it was covered and protected, then the person couldn't
> see very well. And if it wasn't (and the style at the time
> was against it), then...
His head might well have been missing?
> But I'm sure that the Norwegians had no love for Tostig. He
> did not deliver the promised uprising. And he was not important
> enough to move very far. But he *was* the King's brother, so
> a burial in York is likely. But I'd think not in the Minster
> because he died a rebel.
>
> That's just my uneducated guess.
I wondered where Harald Hardrada's "six foot of English soil" was too? Near
the battlefield and unmarked I'd imagine.
Tosty is long lost I fear, like so many others. You weren't hoping for a
facial reconstruction I hope? (Now that I would *love* to see!)
On a more hopeful note, I was wondering about doing a reconstruction of
George, Duke of Clarence and Isabel Neville (currently parked in a glass
'coffin' in Tewkesbury Abbey). There are two faces from the past I would
*really* like to see.
Also her dad, Warwick the Kingmaker of course (though I'm pretty sure I know
what he looked like, I'd like to 'check'... unfortunately, he's not
available at the moment, somewhere under Bisham Abbey).
And of course his daughter Anne and both her husbands, though I'm afraid the
second one's skull might be somewhat hard to locate.
Who else I wonder? King Harold, Lord Stanley and brother William of course,
John Neville (a great big bruiser, but not many pictures of him... only two,
current whereabouts unknown), King John, John DeVere Earl of Oxford (body
now lost), Willm. the Conqueror (unavailable, but I have a pic of him from
when he was exhumed in good nick - looks a right thug) but most intriguing
(and unattainable!) of all - Henry Holland, Duke of Exeter (out of reach
somewhere at the bottom of the Channel). No pics of him anywhere, or his
relatives. It really shouldn't happen to someone so thoroughly horrible!
Anyone else you'd like to see 're-created' (grave desecration
notwithstanding). They did a good job on King Midas (miserable looking old
bugger, but then there was that problem with the gold daughter I suppose?)
and others. All you need is a skull really?
Cheers
martin
Renia
> According to William of Malmesbury's 'Gesta Regum' (written around 1125)
> Tostig's body was recognised on the battlefield at Stamford Bridge by a wart
> between the shoulder blades. It was then taken to York where he was buried.
>
> In the Minster ?
>
> As far as I'm aware, no other Anglo/Norman Chronicler mentions what happened
> to his body after the battle.
>
> Any other offers, possibly from Scandinavia ?
>
> Cheers
>
> Michael
Simon Schama has him buried in York Minster (no sources).
Renia
Tron Furu
"Martin Reboul" <mar...@reboul1471.freeserve.co.uk> skrev i melding
news:blakem$jf5
> I wondered where Harald Hardrada's "six foot of English soil" was too?
"Seven foot, or as much as he was taller than other men" (Heimskringla).
Near
> the battlefield and unmarked I'd imagine.
Short lease. Haardraade was taken to Nidaros and buried in the Mariakirke
(Church of Mary) the following year.
T
Martin Reboul
Tron Furu wrote...
>
> Martin Reboul skrev...
> > I wondered where Harald Hardrada's "six foot of English soil" was too?
>
> "Seven foot, or as much as he was taller than other men" (Heimskringla).
>
> Near
> > the battlefield and unmarked I'd imagine.
>
> Short lease. Haardraade was taken to Nidaros and buried in the Mariakirke
> (Church of Mary) the following year.
That's good news (well, not for Harald - never even got his seven feet).
I'm not sure where that is, but if he is still 'available' as it were, boy
would I love to see his face!
Cheers
Martin
Paul J Gans
Yeah. It is one of the hateful things that publishers do.
If it is intended for a popular audience (i.e. ignorant
louts) then you are not allowed to have footnotes or
references.
Which is one of the things that keeps ignorant louts ignorant.
---- Paul J. Gans
Vaughan Sanders
"Tron Furu" <tron...@frisurf.no> wrote in message
news:rx%db.26642$os2.3...@news2.e.nsc.no...
Florence says Hardrada landed at Riccal.
Archaeology shows as many as 700 graves at Riccal, those excavated
definitely born in Norway and carbon dated to the period.
Apart from Snorri's saga little is known of Stamford Bridge, the Berserk
story is not repeated by Snorri, the ASC account is most likely a 12
century addition, making it contemporary with William of Malmesbury and
Henry of Huntingdon etc.
Btw, many of the remains at Riccal show battle wounds, some are women
and children.
Jamie
Michael W Cook
ja...@chalkwell-windsurfing.fsnet.co.uk wrote on 30/9/03 7:41 pm:
Orderic Vitalis tells us that when he visited the battle site at Stamford
Bridge, the bones of the dead still littered the field. This must have been
around 40 years after the event.
Michael W Cook
ren...@ntlworld.com wrote on 30/9/03 2:03 am:
> Simon Schama has him buried in York Minster (no sources).
>
> Renia
Thanks, Renia, I had checked his book as well.
As Paul say's, he gives no sources, but does have a selected bibliography at
the back of his book. In this, he only mentions Orderic Vitalis and the ASC
which cover this period with any accuracy, and these don't mention Tostig's
body and burial place.
Regards
Michael W Cook
je...@nowhere.net wrote on 29/9/03 11:39 pm:
Thanks, Tony.
I've checked the usual suspects.
ASC
Poitiers
Jumieges
Florence of Worcester
The Carmen
Orderic
Huntingdon
Wace
Plus several books from R Allen Brown through to the latest authors.
In fact, the version of Malmesbury I have doesn't mention Tostig's burial.
Cheers
Michael W Cook
wrote on 29/9/03 11:19 pm:
>> It has been suggested that the record we have of the northern
>>> battle (which is late) is based on confusion with Hastings.
>
>> Who proposes this, Paul ?
>
> DeVries in his book on the Norwegian invasion of England
> in 1066. But the observation has been made before.
Thank you, I do have this and MUST re-read it.
>>> But in any event, battles involving shield-walls often ended
>>> in just that way.
>
>> Agreed.
>
>>> Which is why the feigned retreat existed and was trained for.
>
>> That's arguable.
>
> It was certainly trained for among the Normans and the
> French. Bachrach has given a number of citations of this
> by them. It was still hard to resist. You are tired, you
> are worn down, and finally the enemy seems to be breaking.
> You *WANT* to believe it. It takes a strong person to
> resist.
You know I have several problems with Bachrach's paper.
I believe it has quite a few holes in it and was not very carefully written.
We discussed it on here around a year or so ago.
"Feigned Retreat" I believe the thread was called.
Regards
Inger Johansson
in many cases we don't arrive to same conclusion. However I second your
lines re. Bachrach's paper.
That said I doubt that we have the full picture thus I guess we will have to
wait until someone manage to make a real good study of early documents and
notes in the subject.
Inger E
"Michael W Cook" <mwc...@btconnect.com> skrev i meddelandet
news:BB9FAF73.103E5%mwc...@btconnect.com...
Paul J Gans
Yes, but I think it difficult to argue that feigned
retreat was not known. There are a number of known
examples, not only from western Europe (where it almost
certainly did NOT originate) but from Byzantium and
points futher east.
And some of the chronicles mention what seems to be
feigned retreat.
I don't know of any such thing involving foot. There
it becomes too complex. Unless very well trained foot
tend to keep on going once they start running. That's
because the other guys chasing you run as fast or faster
than you do.
Cavalry, on the other hand, have a distinct advantage
when not facing other cavalry (as was the case at Hastings).
They can feign panic and gallop out of the area -- and
after half a mile or so, turn and reform. There's nobody
around them to stop them.
---- Paul J. Gans
Tron Furu
> In soc.history.medieval Michael W Cook <mwc...@btconnect.com> wrote:
> >in article blab5n$3v4$2...@reader2.panix.com, Paul J Gans at ga...@panix.com
> >wrote on 29/9/03 11:19 pm:
>
> it becomes too complex. Unless very well trained foot
> tend to keep on going once they start running. That's
> because the other guys chasing you run as fast or faster
> than you do.
Although not really feigned _panic_, what about (OT/s.h.m.) Cannae? Letting
your centre get pressed in to envelop the enemy with your own wings
(flanks?) worked for Hannibal, and must have worked both before and
afterward.
T
Vaughan Sanders
"Michael W Cook" <mwc...@btconnect.com> wrote in message
news:BB9FAB70.103E2%mwc...@btconnect.com...
Where does he say he *visited* Stamford Bridge, Michael?.
"Travellers cannot fail to recognise the field, for a great mountain of
dead men's bones still lies there and bears witness to the terrible
slaughter on both side".
This could have been just urban legend he had heard, remember he also
says 15000 Norman Knights fell in a big hole at the Malfosse.
Jamie
Vaughan Sanders
Where did you get this story from Michael?, it's not from Malmesbury's
"Kings before the Norman Conquest", that covers Stamford Bridge.
Schama must have got it from somewhere.
Osbert of Clare's Vita is pretty similar to William of Malmesbury I
think.
Jamie
Michael W Cook
ja...@chalkwell-windsurfing.fsnet.co.uk wrote on 1/10/03 4:20 pm:
>> Orderic Vitalis tells us that when he visited the battle site at
>> Stamford Bridge, the bones of the dead still littered the field. This must
>>have been around 40 years after the event.
>>
>> Cheers
>>
>> Michael
>>
>
> Where does he say he *visited* Stamford Bridge, Michael?.
>
> "Travellers cannot fail to recognise the field, for a great mountain of
> dead men's bones still lies there and bears witness to the terrible
> slaughter on both side".
>
> This could have been just urban legend he had heard, remember he also
> says 15000 Norman Knights fell in a big hole at the Malfosse.
>
> Jamie
Ecclesiastical History of Orderic Vitalis
Volume II books III and IV
Pages 168 and N1.
Short description of battle omitted.
"In the end victory came to the relentless English, and Harold king of the
Norwegians with Tostig and all his forces fell on the field of battle.
Travellers cannot fail to recognise the field, for a mountain of dead men's
bones still lies there and bears witness to the terrible slaughter on both
sides."
Orderic most likely used Florence of Worcester for his account of the Battle
of Stamford Bridge. Yet Florence doesn't mention any bones still on the
field, and nobody else does either, except Orderic. He did come to England
on at least one occasion we know about, and considering his interest in the
battle and the Conquest, he could very well have gone to the site of the
battle.
It's my opinion he talks of it as if he's witnessed it himself.
As for his 15.000 Norman dead at Malfosse -he has 50.000 knights with
William at St Valery before the crossing.
15.000 = a lot of men = 50+ 100+
50.000 = a hell of a lot of men = 1000 upwards
It's like today when we talk of large numbers......... say ants.
"There were thousands of them" or even millions, when in reality there were
probably no more than a few hundred.
Michael W Cook
ja...@chalkwell-windsurfing.fsnet.co.uk wrote on 1/10/03 4:40 pm:
'Battle of Hastings 1066'
MK Lawson page 38
"...both Henry of Huntingdon and William of Malmesbury knew of the lone
Norwegian hero, and the latter says that Tostig's body was buried in York
after it was recognised by a wart between the shoulder blades..."
Plenty of refs. from Lawson, but not on this.
It's not in Malmesbury's History of the Norman Kings I have either.
It's apparently in his 'Gesta Regum Anglorium: History of the English Kings'
ed and trans RAB Mynors, RM Thompson and M Winterbottom (Oxford 1998-9)
Schama says Tostig was buried in the Minster - no refs.
Kelly DeVries in his 'The Norwegian Invasion of England in 1066' says Harold
commanded Tostig's body to be taken to York and buried in an unknown church,
again no refs.
No chronicler reports how Tostig was killed.
Tony Jebson
> It's apparently in his 'Gesta Regum Anglorium: History
> of the English Kings' ed and trans RAB Mynors, RM
> Thompson and M Winterbottom (Oxford 1998-9)
It's in the Gesta, section 253.1
"Cadauer eius, inditio uerrucae inter duas scapulas
agnitum, sepulturam Eboraci meruit."
"His body, recognized by the evidence of a wart
between the shoulder-blades, received the honour
of a burial at York."
> Schama says Tostig was buried in the Minster - no refs.
>
> Kelly DeVries in his 'The Norwegian Invasion of England
> in 1066' says Harold commanded Tostig's body to be taken
> to York and buried in an unknown church, again no refs.
My guess is that both Schama and De Vries rely
of W of M. Schama seems to assume the minster
because of the honour of buial (meruit). DeVries
is more conservative and doesn't identify the church.
> No chronicler reports how Tostig was killed.
Nothing in John of Worcester either
--- Tony Jebson
Vaughan Sanders
Hmm
There's 16 manuscripts of Gesta Regum Anglorium that are generaly
reconised, none read the same, (apart from D and Arundel 161;
13century).
It's thought Malmesbury edited and improved his history long after the
first edition went into circulation.
There's also other copies that appear to have been taken from one or
other of the above exemplars.
I checked Churchill's HESP, he repeats Snorri's saga but has nothing on
the fate of Tostig after he was killed.
Jamie
Vaughan Sanders
That's what I was getting at, he's prone to exaggerate, it's just as
likely he is doing the same with the story of the bones.
He say's he visited Worcester and saw the work of Florence / John, and
Cambrai in Lorraine for the work of Sigbert of Gembloux. Other than that
he doesn't appear to have strayed far from the monastery of St Evroul.
Jamie
Vaughan Sanders
"Tony Jebson" <je...@nowhere.net> wrote in message
news:vsadnXQduJi...@texas.net...
> Michael W Cook[snip]
> > It's apparently in his 'Gesta Regum Anglorium: History
> > of the English Kings' ed and trans RAB Mynors, RM
> > Thompson and M Winterbottom (Oxford 1998-9)
>
> It's in the Gesta, section 253.1
>
> "Cadauer eius, inditio uerrucae inter duas scapulas
> agnitum, sepulturam Eboraci meruit."
>
> "His body, recognized by the evidence of a wart
> between the shoulder-blades, received the honour
> of a burial at York."
>
Do you know which manuscript this is from and how many Ms have this
entry.
It would appear that Ms used for earlier translations don't have this
entry.
Jamie
snip
Michael W Cook
je...@nowhere.net wrote on 2/10/03 2:53 am:
> Michael W Cook[snip]
>> It's apparently in his 'Gesta Regum Anglorium: History
>> of the English Kings' ed and trans RAB Mynors, RM
>> Thompson and M Winterbottom (Oxford 1998-9)
>
> It's in the Gesta, section 253.1
>
> "Cadauer eius, inditio uerrucae inter duas scapulas
> agnitum, sepulturam Eboraci meruit."
>
> "His body, recognized by the evidence of a wart
> between the shoulder-blades, received the honour
> of a burial at York."
Thank you, Tony, at least one of us has got it then :-)
>> Schama says Tostig was buried in the Minster - no refs.
>>
>> Kelly DeVries in his 'The Norwegian Invasion of England
>> in 1066' says Harold commanded Tostig's body to be taken
>> to York and buried in an unknown church, again no refs.
>
> My guess is that both Schama and De Vries rely
> of W of M. Schama seems to assume the minster
> because of the honour of buial (meruit). DeVries
> is more conservative and doesn't identify the church.
Yes, I agree.
The word 'honour' would immediately lead one to assume it was the Minster.
Perhaps Malmesbury didn't mention the Minster because by just mentioning
York there could only be one place he could mean.
However, despite Schama's speculation, DeVries is correct really, as the
church is unidentified.
>
>> No chronicler reports how Tostig was killed.
>
> Nothing in John of Worcester either
No surprise, DeVries seems to think that the Anglo/Norman Chroniclers took
most of their short accounts from the Scandinavian sources. Interestingly
though, the story of the lone Norwegian on the bridge holding back the
English army can be only found in the Anglo/Norman accounts.
Paul J Gans
The exaggerated usage of numbers is common in the Middle
Ages, as you know. It wasn't just Orderic Vitalis.
I think that we have to consider that it was not an era of
precision in enumeration. And I think it fair to say that
numbers were used to give impressions such as "large army"
or "huge army" and were never meant to be taken literally.
---- Paul J. Gans
Paul J Gans
I'm sure that could work, but it is a different sort of thing
(and harder to stop, I'd think.)
When you see the enemy horse break formations and run, seemingly
panic stricken, it can mean only one thing.
The possibility of the cavalry doing this and so causing the
foot to run for it as well, lead several medieval generals to
dismount their cavalry to show their foot that they would not
be abandoned.
---- Paul J. Gans
Michael W Cook
wrote on 30/9/03 11:21 pm:
>> You know I have several problems with Bachrach's paper.
>> I believe it has quite a few holes in it and was not very carefully written.
>
> Yes, but I think it difficult to argue that feigned
> retreat was not known. There are a number of known
> examples, not only from western Europe (where it almost
> certainly did NOT originate) but from Byzantium and
> points futher east.
I don't argue it was not known to the Normans.
> And some of the chronicles mention what seems to be
> feigned retreat.
>
> I don't know of any such thing involving foot. There
> it becomes too complex. Unless very well trained foot
> tend to keep on going once they start running. That's
> because the other guys chasing you run as fast or faster
> than you do.
Doesn't DeVries say the Edwin and Morcar did one at Fulford ?
Must check later, book not to hand right now.
> Cavalry, on the other hand, have a distinct advantage
> when not facing other cavalry (as was the case at Hastings).
> They can feign panic and gallop out of the area -- and
> after half a mile or so, turn and reform. There's nobody
> around them to stop them.
>
> ---- Paul J. Gans
Bachrach disagrees with Lt Col Charles H Lemmon's view that it was
not a feigned retreat, and then goes on to give several examples of the
tactic being used in Ancient times up until its use by the Normans at Arques
in 1053 and at Messina in 1060.
Lemmon's view is that such a tactic:
"'would demand that every man taking part in it had to know when to retreat,
how far to retreat and when to turn around and fight back; and, moreover,
that these movements had to be carefully synchronised, or disaster would
result."
I, in part, tend to agree with him.
Firstly because on the far left of the battlefield it would be difficult to
see exactly what was going on on the right.
The Breton's advancing up the slope to meet the shield wall soon ran into
difficulties, a fact which is acknowledged by both the contemporary
chronicles, William of Poitiers and Guy of Amiens, also later by William
of Malmesbury.
William of Poitiers:
"So, terrified by the ferocity, both the footsoldiers and the Breton knights
and other auxiliaries on the left wing turned tail; almost the whole of the
Dukes battle line gave way...."
The Carmen:
"The English, superior in numbers, beat back the foe and forcibly compel
them to flee. Thus the fight which had started as a sham became one dictated
by the enemy's strength. The Normans turn tail; their shields protect their
backs. When the Duke saw that his people were beaten and in retreat, he rode
up, and, signalling with his hand, rebukes them and strikes them, and
restrains and checks them with his lance".
The Bretons were chased by the 'Levies' down the slope to the bog area today
known as Fishponds, where, it seems, they suffered a large number of
casualties. This would have immediately left William's flank exposed with a
very real danger of being outflanked. If he had stayed fighting at the
centre of the shield wall, this would most likely have happened.
So, his only option was to retreat the rest of his army back down the slope
and regroup. This is what he did. (Almost exactly the same as the British
Expeditionary Force retreat at Mons in 1914, when their right flank was
exposed by the French who had withdrawn.)
Once William's army had successfully retreated, and he saw that the rest of
the shield wall had held and not broken in pursuit, he was able to organise
a counter attack on the Saxon levies who had followed the Bretons - Knowing
there was no immediate danger of being assaulted.
Evidence for this is also in the Chronicles and Bayeux Tapestry, William and
Odo rallying the troops - if your retreat was planned, there would be no
reason to rally the troops.
The feigned retreat has been accepted by many as correct, using the previous
occasions at Arques and Messina to back this up as part of the Normans
tactics. In reality, Poitiers description above is the give-away.
The chroniclers would obviously not say right out that the Normans had to
retreat, when in all likelihood it is exactly what they did, it was a
necessity or face defeat.
No, I've said it before and I'll say it again, Bachrach's paper is poor and
full of holes, counter evidence hits you right in the face after just a
little reading of the Chronicles.
Tony Jebson
> > It's in the Gesta, section 253.1
Oops . . . 252.2.
> > "Cadauer eius, inditio uerrucae inter duas scapulas
> > agnitum, sepulturam Eboraci meruit."
> >
> > "His body, recognized by the evidence of a wart
> > between the shoulder-blades, received the honour
> > of a burial at York."
> >
>
> Do you know which manuscript this is from and how
> many Ms have this entry.
>
> It would appear that Ms used for earlier translations don't
> have this entry.
Difficult to tell exactly. The Mynors et al edition tries to show
what is common to the CB stock and is silent on many
differences between individual mauscripts.
A rough transmission goes:
W1 (working draft 1) ---> T family of manuscripts
|
v
COPY
|
v
W2, with revisions ---> Al and Aa families
|
v
W3, with revisions ---> C and B families
My guess is that TA manuscripts could omit this but it's
hard to tell -- though the general scheme used makes me
think this passage is common to most manuscripts.
--- Tony Jebson
Renia
> in article a387cf87.03092...@posting.google.com, Renia at
> ren...@ntlworld.com wrote on 30/9/03 2:03 am:
>
> > Simon Schama has him buried in York Minster (no sources).
> >
> > Renia
>
> Thanks, Renia, I had checked his book as well.
>
> As Paul say's, he gives no sources, but does have a selected bibliography at
> the back of his book. In this, he only mentions Orderic Vitalis and the ASC
> which cover this period with any accuracy, and these don't mention Tostig's
> body and burial place.
A History of York from Baine's Gazetteer (1823)
Part 6
YORK'S CATHEDRAL
QUOTE The number of persons of rank and distinction, whose mortal
remains are deposited in this ancient temple, is very considerable.
The head of Edwin, the first christian king of Northumberland, was
interred in the cathedral at York, and his body in the monastery at
Whitby. History also records, amongst the persons interred here, the
names of Eadbert and Eanbald, kings of Northumberland; Swein, king of
Denmark; Tosti, brother of king Harold; UNQUOTE
See:
http://www.genuki.org.uk/big/eng/YKS/ARY/York/YorkHistory6.html
Renia
Paul J Gans
>See:
>http://www.genuki.org.uk/big/eng/YKS/ARY/York/YorkHistory6.html
Sure, but where do THEY get their information. Surely there is
no marked grave for Tostig visible now.
Late references are of no help unless they give their sources.
---- Paul J. Gans
Paul J Gans
Whoa.
I think that many folks agree that the first retreat was
not feigned. It was real and William rallied his forces
only with difficulty.
But several sources say that William, having seen how
the Saxons broke the line after the real retreat, then
ordered a feigned one several more times during the
course of the day.
Now that is not unlikely. It does not have to involve
the whole army nor even all the cavalry. And there is
evidence that the maneuver was known and trained for.
All that is needed is a preplan as to where to turn and
regroup. That could be on the leader's initiative if
he led the flight. It was an entirely safe move since
the Saxons had no cavalry and could not really threaten
the retreating horse.
If it drew some Saxons out of position, good. Otherwise,
no harm done.
---- Paul J. Gans
Renia
I don't know what you mean by late reference, in this context, but
this was published in 1823. The author (elsewhere) refers to the
annals of York, by which I take him to mean material in the York
Minster archives, which were begun before the invasion. That material
is now at the University of York at the Borthwick Institute.
There would be no marked grave, because the original minster was
destroyed in 1069 (save the foundations) and was rebuilt by Thomas of
Bayeux.
Prior to this period, York Minister was not so important is it
subsequently became. Till the Danish invasion the archbishops of
Canterbury occasionally exercised authority, and it was not till the
Norman Conquest that the archbishops of York asserted their complete
independence.
The question is, where else in York would Tostig be buried? The other
Churches mentioned in Domesday are: St Cuthbert; St John; St Peter; St
Wilfrid and Holy Trinity.
Renia
Vaughan Sanders
Vaughan Sanders
The *history records* at the start of this qoute would appear to point
to Malmesbury.
Still, if Harold's mother offered his weight in gold for his body after
Hastings, I assume, she would have seen that her other sons got decent
burials.
Also, Edith the ex-queen was much closer to her brother Tostig than to
Harold by all accounts.
Jamie
Thur
"Renia" <ren...@ntlworld.com> wrote in message
news:a387cf87.03100...@posting.google.com...
> Paul J Gans <ga...@panix.com> wrote in message
news:<blienc$r4d$6...@reader2.panix.com>...
> > In soc.history.medieval Renia <ren...@ntlworld.com> wrote:
> > >Michael W Cook <mwc...@btconnect.com> wrote in message
news:<BB9FAC6D.103E3%mwc...@btconnect.com>...
> > >> in article a387cf87.03092...@posting.google.com, Renia at
> > >> ren...@ntlworld.com wrote on 30/9/03 2:03 am:
> > >>
>
> The question is, where else in York would Tostig be buried? The other
> Churches mentioned in Domesday are: St Cuthbert; St John; St Peter; St
> Wilfrid and Holy Trinity.
>
> Renia
I claim nothing for this, but you may be interested in this reference to
Tostig here.
If acceptable, then Tostig may have well been buried in this church.?
http://www.ronw25013.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/st_johns_history.htm
Thur
Michael W Cook
wrote on 3/10/03 2:25 am:
Bee in my bonnet :-)
> I think that many folks agree that the first retreat was
> not feigned. It was real and William rallied his forces
> only with difficulty.
>
> But several sources say that William, having seen how
> the Saxons broke the line after the real retreat, then
> ordered a feigned one several more times during the
> course of the day.
I agree in part to the above, however, Bachrach doesn't mention the first
occasion being a real retreat out of necessity, when the Saxon line actually
chased them down the hill.
> Now that is not unlikely. It does not have to involve
> the whole army nor even all the cavalry. And there is
> evidence that the maneuver was known and trained for.
Amongst the Normans, perhaps, but let's not forget that over half of
William's army was made up of French, Bretons, mercenaries and other
auxiliaries, who wouldn't have been trained.
William's cavalry were hardly 'shock' troops against a shield wall, and as
Anne Hyland has pointed out, unless a charge against a shield wall is
concerted and positioned together in tight formation, it's effectiveness is
diminished considerably.
It seems the Norman Cavalry did have difficulty with this all day.
> All that is needed is a preplan as to where to turn and
> regroup. That could be on the leader's initiative if
> he led the flight. It was an entirely safe move since
> the Saxons had no cavalry and could not really threaten
> the retreating horse.
Medieval battles rarely if ever allow for pre-planned manoeuvres such as a
feigned retreat to be successfully put into operation. For one thing the
opportunity may never present itself whereby the conditions enable such a
thing to be put into practice.
Let's not forget either, Hastings was also William's first major battle
commanding such a large army on his own.
> If it drew some Saxons out of position, good. Otherwise,
> no harm done.
Sure, I can accept he may have ordered one later in the day, especially as
he was not getting very far on breaking the shield wall. However, my point
is that Bachrach doesn't even dwell on any of this, and between us in the
little we have both written, we have discussed and covered far more than he
does in his entire paper.
Personally I'm not convinced, to me it seems obvious that the first occasion
was the Breton's turning tail and running from the field. William stopped
them, and through his leadership turned what could have been a disaster into
his own advantage, mainly by some the Saxons leaving the shield wall as
opposed to them all doing so en masse.
The later use of the tactic thereby becomes extremely arguable.
After seeing the dangers of being caught out earlier, and the slaughter of
their comrades in the open by the cavalry, you'd think the Saxon's would
certainly be wary of doing a similar thing again, especially once you've
seen the whole wall is again not following you.
Indicipline may have caused several on occasions to have chanced it,
especially after the death of Harold's brothers and the probable lack of
decent troop commanders later n the day. But to get caught out three times I
find very difficult to believe.
Cheers
Vaughan Sanders
"Vaughan Sanders" <ja...@chalkwell-windsurfing.fsnet.co.uk> wrote in
message news:...
>
> "Paul J Gans" <ga...@panix.com> wrote in message
> news:blienc$r4d$6...@reader2.panix.com...
> > In soc.history.medieval Renia <ren...@ntlworld.com> wrote:
> > >Michael W Cook <mwc...@btconnect.com> wrote in message
> news:<BB9FAC6D.103E3%mwc...@btconnect.com>...
> > >> in article a387cf87.03092...@posting.google.com, Renia
> at
> > >> ren...@ntlworld.com wrote on 30/9/03 2:03 am:
> > >>
This may be of interest, Barlow in his introduction to the Vita Edwardi
Regis says, "Tostig was accompanied to Stamford Bridge by his two sons,
who may or may not have been the children of his wife Countess Judith".
Harold spared Hardrada's son, so it would not be unreasonable to think
he would have spared Tostig's sons if they had survived the battle,
presumably they would have seen to their father's burial.
Jamie
Renia
> >> According to William of Malmesbury's 'Gesta Regum' (written around 1125)
> >> Tostig's body was recognised on the battlefield at Stamford Bridge by a wart
> >> between the shoulder blades. It was then taken to York where he was buried.
> >>
> >> In the Minster ?
> >>
> >> to his body after the battle.
> >>
> >> Any other offers, possibly from Scandinavia ?
> >>
> >> Cheers
> >>
> >> Michael
>
> >Simon Schama has him buried in York Minster (no sources).
>
> If it is intended for a popular audience (i.e. ignorant
> louts) then you are not allowed to have footnotes or
> references.
>
> Which is one of the things that keeps ignorant louts ignorant.
This smacks of intellectual snobbery.
So what exactly are you saying about Simon Schama's worthiness as an
historian?
He's British but a Professor of History at Columbia University, New
York. Do you know him?
There is nothing wrong with having popular history for the masses.
It's the only way to get it to them. They don't want to be bothered
with tiny footnotes so I, for one, applaud any method of widening the
historical audience.
Renia
Paul J Gans
>Jamie
Sure. The problem lies in the lack of records. Further,
there is a time problem too. Arrangements for final resting
places for the nobility took time, and the elapsed time from
the death of Tostig to the death of Harold is not large.
Nevertheless, burial at York Minster is a reasonable assumption.
But unless there are records in York we don't know about, it is
only an assumption.
---- Paul J. Gans
Paul J Gans
That's late for a burial that took place in 1066. I don't
suppose the author interviewed eye-witnesses.
>The author (elsewhere) refers to the
>annals of York, by which I take him to mean material in the York
>Minster archives, which were begun before the invasion. That material
>is now at the University of York at the Borthwick Institute.
We've all noted that there might be more information at York.
However, nobody, including our man in 1823, has actually cited
any.
>There would be no marked grave, because the original minster was
>destroyed in 1069 (save the foundations) and was rebuilt by Thomas of
>Bayeux.
Agreed.
>Prior to this period, York Minister was not so important is it
>subsequently became. Till the Danish invasion the archbishops of
>Canterbury occasionally exercised authority, and it was not till the
>Norman Conquest that the archbishops of York asserted their complete
>independence.
Agreed.
>The question is, where else in York would Tostig be buried? The other
>Churches mentioned in Domesday are: St Cuthbert; St John; St Peter; St
>Wilfrid and Holy Trinity.
I do believe that I originally suggested the Minster for this
exact reason.
---- Paul J. Gans
Paul J Gans
That's entirely likely.
---- Paul J. Gans
Paul J Gans
>Paul J Gans <ga...@panix.com> wrote in message news:<blap5q$8jk$2...@reader2.panix.com>...
>> In soc.history.medieval Renia <ren...@ntlworld.com> wrote:
>> >Michael W Cook <mwc...@btconnect.com> wrote in message news:<BB9DFC6F.10333%mwc...@btconnect.com>...
>> >> According to William of Malmesbury's 'Gesta Regum' (written around 1125)
>> >> Tostig's body was recognised on the battlefield at Stamford Bridge by a wart
>> >> between the shoulder blades. It was then taken to York where he was buried.
>> >>
>> >> In the Minster ?
>> >>
>> >> As far as I'm aware, no other Anglo/Norman Chronicler mentions what happened
>> >> to his body after the battle.
>> >>
>> >> Any other offers, possibly from Scandinavia ?
>> >>
>> >> Cheers
>> >>
>> >> Michael
>>
>> >Simon Schama has him buried in York Minster (no sources).
>>
>> Yeah. It is one of the hateful things that publishers do.
>> If it is intended for a popular audience (i.e. ignorant
>> louts) then you are not allowed to have footnotes or
>> references.
>>
>> Which is one of the things that keeps ignorant louts ignorant.
>This smacks of intellectual snobbery.
Not at all.
>So what exactly are you saying about Simon Schama's worthiness as an
>historian?
>He's British but a Professor of History at Columbia University, New
>York. Do you know him?
I've never met him but I do know of him and we have
acquaintances in common.
>There is nothing wrong with having popular history for the masses.
>It's the only way to get it to them. They don't want to be bothered
>with tiny footnotes so I, for one, applaud any method of widening the
>historical audience.
I agree with you, but books without references rapidly
turn sour.
Let me give a slightly different example where emotions
are not so high.
Yale University Press published an excellent book by
Christopher Dyer entitled _Making a Living in the
Middle Ages_ and subtitled "The People of Britain 850-1520".
It is a book that I highly recommend to everyone with an
interest in that subject.
Since I teach a course for which this would be a natural
textbook, I considered it rather carefully.
Dyer manages to smash a boatload of myths about the
Middle Ages as he goes along. In reading it I wondered
what his evidence was.
I couldn't find any. No footnotes. There *is* a bibliography
in the back broken up by chapters, but there is no indication
that these were the only sources he used. Indeed, I'm sure
they were not since no papers are listed.
So what am I to do? If a student asks about one of those
things am I to simply appeal to authority and say "Well,
Professor Dyer says..."?
Why was this book published? It is of no scholarly use
since little can be checked. And it is of limited popular
use since it has to compete with other "take my word for
it" books like "Holy Blood, Holy Grail" and the like.
I have no idea why publishing houses destroy the value of
an author's work in this way. Is it simply in hopes of
greater profit?
---- Paul J. Gans
Vaughan Sanders
Yes, but I don't know the source of Tostig's two sons, it's not the Vita
Edwardi Regis. Barlow is referring to fidelity in marriage mentioned by
the Anonymous, remember these people are Vikings, Polygamy and all that.
Northumbria was ruled by feuding Viking clans at this time, Copsi for
example was Tostig's deputy when he held sway. Tostig had murdered his
way to power in Northumbria, his sister Edith had murdered one of the
Northumbrian thanes at Edward's court to help him to power.
Harold had sold out his brother Tostig to the Mercian earls Edwin and
Morcar to gain the crown.
Copsi was appointed Earl of Northumbria by William in 1067, Copsi was
almost immediately murdered by the Northumbrian thanes, apparently Copsi
had survived Stamford Bridge or never turned up to support Tostig.
Jamie
Soren Larsen
"Renia" <ren...@ntlworld.com> skrev i en meddelelse
news:a387cf87.03100...@posting.google.com...
King Svein was first buried at York but he was later transferred to
Roskilde in Denmark.
Cheers
Soren Larsen
Martin Reboul
Paul J Gans wrote ...
> Vaughan Sanders wrote:
>
> >Paul J Gans wrote ...
> >> Renia wrote:
> >> >Michael W Cook wrote...
I think we can effectively write off any prospect of discovering him alas,
as the cathedral has been rebuilt a couple of times since and is absolutely
vast. Like most of York, it is probably built upon the remains of countless
thousands of dead bodies, and I fear Tosty will neither be marked nor
distinguishable, considering the circumstances of his demise and position at
the time.
London is probably even more confusing and worse for 'finding people'. Dig a
trench virtually anywhere within the City, and you will find a waterlogged
power cable, sewer, underground train tunnel, bomb shelter, UXB or if you
are really lucky, a plague pit or cemetery which could date back to the Iron
Age or beyond.
The whole place is littered with the bones of the dead, built between and
around them, and they can be found at almost any level. A quick 'mudlarking'
on the banks of the Thames usually shows up some human remains, never mind
the mass of remains left over of the animals they ate.
I would dread being an archaeologist in charge of any serious dig in such a
hellhole - yet fascinated, eager and enthusiastic at the same time....
I attended one at York, which was ghastly but fascinating.
Cheers
Martin
Renia
He did. Elsewhere, as I said: the annals of York.
There is a lot of material which, I'm sure, even You, Paul, hasn't had
access to. It is sitting there, at the Borthwick, for your perusal, if
you can understand the Latin.
> >There would be no marked grave, because the original minster was
> >destroyed in 1069 (save the foundations) and was rebuilt by Thomas of
> >Bayeux.
>
> Agreed.
>
> >Prior to this period, York Minister was not so important is it
> >subsequently became. Till the Danish invasion the archbishops of
> >Canterbury occasionally exercised authority, and it was not till the
> >Norman Conquest that the archbishops of York asserted their complete
> >independence.
>
> Agreed.
>
> >The question is, where else in York would Tostig be buried? The other
> >Churches mentioned in Domesday are: St Cuthbert; St John; St Peter; St
> >Wilfrid and Holy Trinity.
>
> I do believe that I originally suggested the Minster for this
> exact reason.
No, you didnt't. You said on this thread, in your first reply to it:
"But I'd think not in the Minster because he died a rebel."
Renia
Paul J Gans
Wasn't Hardrada a Christian by then? I thought that most
of the Norse were converted by 1000? But I could easily
be remembering wrongly.
Not that that would have changed anything... ;-)
--- Paul J. Gans
Paul J Gans
You are quite right. I'd have thought that Harold would have
left orders.
Sorry about that.
---- Paul J. Gans
a.spencer3
All of which presumably makes the Flashman books excellent sources! :-))
Surreyman
Renia
Not all books are published with scholars in mind. If you need a
scholarly work for your coursework, then use one. You might like
"Everyday Life in Medieval England" also by Christopher Dyer (ISBN 1
85285 112 0), which is fully sourced. Or perhaps you could write to
him, as a teacher, and ask for his sources.
It is as important to capture the non-scholarly reader as the
scholarly one so not all books can be fully sourced or the general
reader wouldn't bother. And the general reader wouldn't buy the book.
And the publisher wouldn't make any money, never mind profit. Only
international best-sellers are vastly profitable for publishers. They
probably subsidise everything else.
You could of course write your own course book, complete with primary
sources, but that would take an awful lot of research on your part and
it might not sell. Many of the more scholarly books you are after are
published under the wing of universities, often as published PhDs, and
they are not big sellers.
You can't please all of the people . . .
Renia
Vaughan Sanders
As was Cnut who had at least two wives possibly three, which was to lead
directly to the antagonism between the Godwines and the Normans.
Barlow is inferring that Tostig had sons by a concubine, which I hadn't
heard before, Harold had sons by concubines but none by his Christian
wife who was the sister of the Mercian earls.
Harold's sons attacked William in 1068, landing in Somerset from their
base in Ireland (Dublin presumably). Harold's mother Gytha had held
Exeter until William besieged it in 1067, she escaped to Flanders when
Exeter fell, presumably her grandsons went to Ireland at this time to
raise troops.
The interesting thing about this is, Harold's sons were of military age
in 1066 but either didn't fall at Hastings or weren't there. Also when
they landed in Somerset it was their father's staller Eadnoth who came
against them for William, according to AS sources. Norman sources say it
was Count Brian of the Bretons who came against them, most likely it was
the both the Wessex fyrd and the Bretons who came against the Godwines
and the Irish.
The Irish troops were from Diamait mac-Maelna, king of Leinster and
Dublin, according to the GND.
Btw, Svein Godwinson claims Cnut was his father according to the Vita
Edwardi Regis, Gytha his mother was the sister of Jarl Ulf, Cnut's
brother in law, so this could possibly be true, it would explain why he
appears to get side lined even though he is the eldest brother.
Jamie
Michael W Cook
wrote on 4/10/03 3:59 am:
OK
Let's look at what we have.
There is no evidence to suggest to us how Tostig actually died, except that
he fought bravely and fell on the field shortly after Harold Hardrada.
From William of Malmesbury, courtesy of Tony Jebson:
But let us not forget, William of Malmesbury was writing 60 years after the
event, and his accounts do contain a slight bias towards the English.
"Cadauer eius, inditio uerrucae inter duas scapulas
agnitum, sepulturam Eboraci meruit."
"His body, recognized by the evidence of a wart
between the shoulder-blades, received the honour
of a burial at York."
It's most likely it was Harold who identified Tostig's body on the
battlefield, and only he would/could have issued the orders for the body to
be taken to York for burial.
Despite my earlier thoughts, the 'honour', as Tony and I agreed, rather
suggests to us that Tostig was given a burial afforded to someone of his
status and rank. This also suggests it was most likely in the Minster, but
we can't be absolutely certain on the evidence we have to hand.
Further details, however, may be revealed from the Annals of York.
Surely these have been translated somewhere ?
Any offers ?
Regards
Tony Jebson
[snip]
> "Cadauer eius, inditio uerrucae inter duas scapulas
> agnitum, sepulturam Eboraci meruit."
>
> "His body, recognized by the evidence of a wart
> between the shoulder-blades, received the honour
> of a burial at York."
>
> Despite my earlier thoughts, the 'honour', as Tony and I
> agreed, rather suggests to us that Tostig was given a
> burial afforded to someone of his status and rank. This
> also suggests it was most likely in the Minster, but
> we can't be absolutely certain on the evidence we have
> to hand.
The translation above is Mynor's. I don't like his
"received the honour of burial." I think I'd prefer
something more like "meritted burial" - but I don't
have Niermeyer handy to check post-classical
meanings :-(
--- Tony Jebson
Drew Nicholson
> scholarly one so not all books can be fully sourced or the general
> reader wouldn't bother. And the general reader wouldn't buy the book.
> And the publisher wouldn't make any money, never mind profit. Only
> international best-sellers are vastly profitable for publishers. They
> probably subsidise everything else.
>
What is it about non-scholarly readers that don't like books to be fully
sourced? Is it that a book with footnotes is percieved as too dry to
read?(1) The footnotes take up too much space on the page?
If that's the case, why not do end-notes?(A)
Demonstrably,
Drew (:p)
(1) Terry Pratchett to the nonce(2)
(2) His books are one in a million(3)
(3) Of course million to one chances happen nine times out of ten.(4)
(4) Ooook.
(A) IE, notes at the end of the bit...
Brian M. Scott
For what it's worth, Latham doesn't include the verb; this
suggests that its meaning hadn't changed significantly. He does
have the related <meritorius> 'deserving well, earning merit',
common between 1177 and 1480; this also tends to support 'merited
burial, deserved burial'.
Brian
Renia
Hang on a minute. We, on shm like to get right into detail and analyse
things. We like the minutae. The general reader doesn't know who the
heck Tostig was, never mind care where he was buried. What the general
reader wants to know, is that Harold was killed by an arrow in his
eye. The general reader doesn't give a fig whether it is true.
Couldn't give a monkey's about our fact-by-fact anatlytical stance on
this. Doesn't understand it.
So, if you can, put your mind into the mind of the general reader. For
a moment, imagine that you have absolutely no interest in . . . . what
. . . . producing giant carrots. You haven't got a clue. Don't know
anything about it, yet the thought of producing giant carrots seems
quite interesting.
Are you going to go out and buy a giant tome (e acute) on
carrot-growing. Nah. You'll buy a book on veggies, generally. Do you
want oodles of sources as to the pedigree of the giant carrott? Nah.
Gimme a break. You want the quick method.
So it is with newbies-to-history. At first, you'll go for an
all-rounder book, just to get a general feel for the period. You might
be sold myths, but you don't know that, because you're a newbie. So
you read a bit more. You study a bit more. You become terribly
interested. Only at that point will you accept all those bloody
footnotes which take up half a page. Or end-notes which take up half
the book at the end.
Not everyone in history is as pedantic as we are. Not to say that they
should or should'nt be, but everyone comes into history at their own
pace.
Renia
Dick Wisan
The whole point of putting notes in the back of the book or the back
of the chapter was to keep them off the bottom of the page, because
non-scholarly readers didn't like that. If putting the notes in back
still cannot reach non-scholarly readers, then they should never be
used at all. Notes they belong at the bottom of the page (where
scholars can find them quickly) or nowhere.
--
R. N. (Dick) Wisan - Email: wis...@catskill.net
- Snail: 37 Clinton Street, Oneonta NY 13820, U.S.A.
- Just your opinion, please, ma'am: No fax.
Tron Furu
"Renia" <ren...@ntlworld.com> skrev i melding
news:a387cf87.03100...@posting.google.com...
IMHO the general public is interested in how things are, while a lot of
science is about how things ain't, after all. A lot of research tends to
pull the seaweed out of the puppet, and then it is no fun anymore. People
want to see the forest, not the trees, they are harder to remember, all of
them. (The theory of it is found in Nietzsches "Vom Nutzen und Nachteil der
Historie für das Leben", one of his four "Unzeitgemaesse Betrachtungen";
(very) in short, AFAIR, the use of myth to strengthen your (personal,
national or generally "group"-ish) identity and pride).
Lists of estimated average barley yield per square farmer in Yorkshire
during the second forthnight of Steven and Mathildas no longer effective
rule as defined by considering the yet debatable Rule of X for effective
rule compared to medieval continental feudal neo-romano-saxon legislatative
trends just doesn't stir the emotions in the same way that Richard Lionheart
does.
T
Tron Furu
"Martin Reboul" <mar...@reboul1471.freeserve.co.uk> skrev i melding
news:blkpb4$kj5$1...@newsg3.svr.pol.co.uk...
> I think we can effectively write off any prospect of discovering him alas,
> as the cathedral has been rebuilt a couple of times since and is
absolutely
> vast. Like most of York, it is probably built upon the remains of
countless
> thousands of dead bodies, and I fear Tosty will neither be marked nor
> distinguishable, considering the circumstances of his demise and position
at
> the time.
There's always the wart.
T
Paul J Gans
I'd say so, yes.
--- Paul J. Gans
Paul J Gans
Exactly.
When young I sometimes mis-spent hours looking at scholarly
tomes on what was then called "abnormal psychology". All
the good stuff was in the notes.
--- Paul J. Gans
Paul J Gans
>Historie f?r das Leben", one of his four "Unzeitgemaesse Betrachtungen";
>(very) in short, AFAIR, the use of myth to strengthen your (personal,
>national or generally "group"-ish) identity and pride).
>Lists of estimated average barley yield per square farmer in Yorkshire
>during the second forthnight of Steven and Mathildas no longer effective
>rule as defined by considering the yet debatable Rule of X for effective
>rule compared to medieval continental feudal neo-romano-saxon legislatative
>trends just doesn't stir the emotions in the same way that Richard Lionheart
>does.
>T
You misunderstand. The books I'm talking aoubt give
the barley yeild per acre etc., but they give no source
for the figures. That's the sin.
---- Paul J. Gans
Bryn Fraser
<ga...@panix.com> writes
astonishing... As are Wasson's "Soma"...
--
Bryn Fraser
"I did not have sexual relations with that woman!" Bill Clinton
The Good Old Days, Days of Innocence...
Roy Bailey
<ja...@chalkwell-windsurfing.fsnet.co.uk> writes
[snipped]
>
>Barlow is inferring that Tostig had sons by a concubine,
No, he is implying ...
--
Roy Bailey
West Berkshire.
Vaughan Sanders
"Roy Bailey" <ne...@westberks.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
news:LRzMyLASExf$Ew...@westberks.demon.co.uk...
?
OK, explain the difference.
Jamie
Paul J Gans
That book is very nice, however it isn't a "book" in the
usual sense. It is a disjoint collection of papers published
in various journals, a list of which is found on the obverse
of the contents page. As the original papers were footnoted,
these are to.
But while the book is very useful to those well-read in the
field, it is too specific to be generally useful.
>It is as important to capture the non-scholarly reader as the
>scholarly one so not all books can be fully sourced or the general
>reader wouldn't bother. And the general reader wouldn't buy the book.
>And the publisher wouldn't make any money, never mind profit. Only
>international best-sellers are vastly profitable for publishers. They
>probably subsidise everything else.
>You could of course write your own course book, complete with primary
>sources, but that would take an awful lot of research on your part and
>it might not sell. Many of the more scholarly books you are after are
>published under the wing of universities, often as published PhDs, and
>they are not big sellers.
>You can't please all of the people . . .
That's a good argument, but the Dyer book is not written for
the ordinary person. It is way too specific for the general
reader. The Sciama books were for the general reader and
we can only regret that there are no sources. There are
none for Churchill's "History of the English Speaking People"
either. It is a good read, but I'd not encourage anyone to
rely on it for "facts".
---- Paul J. Gans
Roy Bailey
<ja...@chalkwell-windsurfing.fsnet.co.uk> writes
>
>"Roy Bailey" <ne...@westberks.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
>news:LRzMyLASExf$Ew...@westberks.demon.co.uk...
>> In article <blm5q8$guj$1...@newsg3.svr.pol.co.uk>, Vaughan Sanders
>> <ja...@chalkwell-windsurfing.fsnet.co.uk> writes
>> [snipped]
>> >
>> >Barlow is inferring that Tostig had sons by a concubine,
>>
>> No, he is implying ...
>>
>
>OK, explain the difference.
>
To infer means to reach an opinion from facts or reasoning.
So Barlow was implying that Tostig had sons by a concubine, and from the
hints he gave you inferred that Tostig had sons by a concubine.
Vaughan Sanders
So Barlow couldn't have been inferring and I couldn't have been
implying?
Just to be pedantic or do I mean nit-picking?.
Modern OED,
*infer* 2/ imply, suggest.
*imply* strongly suggest the truth or existence of.
But if you prefer (or do I mean favour?) imply, that's cool with me.
Btw, using your definitions, Barlow's *may or may not* in the context it
is used as a comment on the Latin word "caelebs", and the footnote he
gives, (Cf. P Grierson, 'The relations between England and Flanders
before the Norman Conquest', p110.) would appear to favour infer.
Jamie