The Battle of Hastings

sometimes mon ami you just have to forget about your professor

Well considering he wrote the thread in relation to a paper your french fuckery isn't really welcome here sir.

do you know why people call you burgers?

This guy at least gives you a good starting point OP. At lot of bloggers do take the time to research and present digestible pieces of history, even if they themselves aren't authorities.

Have some autism on the subject.

desuarchive.org/his/thread/1632513/#q1635798

Thanks for the autism. This is probably more fruitful and to the point than the text we read, or our class discussion really. Even if the essay turns out as drivel or shit history is a good place to come and get a fresh perspective.

ayy I remember that thread

Explanation for someone who doesn't get the reference?

There is no reference? Someone is looking for sources for a quick paper they are writing tonight and someone linked a past thread involving the subject. I don't think there is much to "get" here.

Normans weren't French.

No one said they were?

bump

Normies more like it

David Horwath's 1066 seems pretty sympathetic to the English but I don't have any suggestions as to a good and proper Norman source that you could get your hands on ASAP.

Lmao how badly does your ass hurt right now?

None since I don't do anal. Can't say the same about your mother.

>a thousand years later, my ass is still bleeding

Harold Godwinson is an oath-breaking scoundrel who violated a solemn pledge placed over holy relics. The Normans did nothing wrong

Good, now source your words?

youtube.com/watch?v=FW4RKp23Z4M
if you want a quick but somewhat indepth look at the actual battle of hastings and some events leading up to it, I suggest you watch this video it's good to give you a basic idea

God his voice is comfy as fuck. Good newer source to get into things. You are right he gets into the weeds but it's relatively short in terms of what I'd expect from a history video. If only he cited some things for us who are curious.

yeah the narators voice is pretty comfy, and I really like the way he visualized his naration.
but beyond that it's basicly a detailed sneak peak.

Sounds a lot better than my professor and definitely gives a better diagram based break down of the way the military skirmish went down.

This guy could say girrrrtthh to me any day which is what I swear I just heard.

Everyone has his speciality, his is comfy military history.

Whatever you want user

normaninvasion.info/harolds-pledge-to-duke-of-normandy.htm

bbc.co.uk/history/historic_figures/harold_ii_godwineson.shtml

mercedesrochelle.com/wordpress/?p=387

eyewitnesstohistory.com/bayeux.htm

britannia.com/history/monarchs/mon21.html

bbc.co.uk/history/british/normans/background_01.shtml

historylearningsite.co.uk/medieval-england/1066-2/

penelope.uchicago.edu/~grout/encyclopaedia_romana/britannia/anglo-saxon/hastings/anglonorman.html

>yfw Harold isn't even related to the King, a usurper, and is also burning in hell as we speak

Don't swear oaths over holy relics if you can't deliver

thanks t. Normanposter.

No problem user. To stop the memeing for a minute, the Normans were deceptive in getting him to take the oath, and normally under the circumstances a coerced oath would not be permissible. However, an oath upon holy relics, coerced or not, meant all bets were off, which is why the Pope got on board with Duke William.

Thanks. Most of the people were shitposting about how Harold sucked or how much of a bastard William was. Like I said previously, I have a pretty solid pro Harold source I'm working with so I just needed one solid piece of Norman historical perspective. Since I'm in a hurry I think I'll fall back on the U Chicago link. From what I can recall most of their programs, history included, are GOAT tier.

Anyone educated on the topic knows 1066 Normans were pretty much French in every respect

Well I'm here because I am trying to educate myself on the matter.

Oh, I thought you were tried to educate yourself on the invasion specifically

Well, if you need education and why the Normans were French, know that:

-They were culturally French (spoke French, lived according to the French feudal system, adopted French religion, fought like the French and not like vikings)

-They were mostly French ethnically speaking too (as eight generations of interbreeding with the locals had occured since they arrived in France. Rollo's son was already 50% French through his mom, so William seven generations later would be around 80% French genetically)

Any reason then for the continued Norman identity instead of the emergence of a French one? I would at least think there would be a mixture of the two but the Frenchness of the Norms never really came up in my readings or our lectures.

>but the Frenchness of the Norms never really came up in my readings or our lectures.

Maybe you should stop getting your infos from buttdevasted brits then
Either that or it was the work of people who assumed everyone knows that Normans were French and thus didnt feel the need to mention it

But yeah, Normans were French
It's easily verifiable in their behavior, their names, the stuff they left behinf (such as the Bayeux Tapestry), the impact they left on England...
Only a huge effort of mental gymnastics and reaching can allow buttdevasted Lindybeige-tier Bongistanis to try and deny that obvious fact

bump