Discussion in 'Taylor's Tittle-Tattle - General Banter' started by StuBoy, Sep 22, 2020.
Apostrophes? You mean like Judus Iscariot?
I know this wont be popular with some but the HS2 project has been unearthing some interesting archaeological stuff along the way.. including several Romano-British sites.
You can read all about the finding here.. https://www.hs2.org.uk/building-hs2...n the HS2,resembling the layout of Stonehenge.
You can also visit one of the digs shortly.. the ruins of St Mary's medieval church and churchyard at Stoke Mandeville near Aylesbury. You can book tickets here if you like.. https://www.eventbrite.co.uk/e/hs2-fusion-st-marys-field-museum-open-day-tickets-153665488613
PS Dont shoot me i'm only the messenger
Only just discovered this thread and what’s not to like? Lots of interesting stuff about the Romans I didn’t know (I did GCSE/O Level and A Level Latin but was a bit of a party girl in the sixth form so have few recollections of the latter), interjected with points about grammar.
My two penny’s worth (which, ironically, I’m not sure how to spell correctly):
spaces after commas please but not before
Now I can get back to enjoying being educated by all your historical knowledge.
Stand Up for the Classics on Radio 4 11.30am this coming Tuesday hosted by a stand up comic who read Classics Mr IBB tells me.
Natalie Haynes who describes herself as a "...classicist who does stand-up...". I find her actual stand-up (not the classics stuff) very "meh" but she's extremely engaging (and funny) when she's 'riffing' around her area of academic expertise. She's produced some marvellous stuff for the beeb (especially her early solo shows).
I'm looking forward to it until I forget about it and then thrash myself to within an inch of my life!
There's loads of her radio shows on BBC sounds.
I enjoyed Mr Allchorns lessons but not as much as Mr Harts . Hart was a great teacher , at A level he used to tell us to put down our pens and just listen . He was a great story teller .
Mr Allchorn was obsessed with the term “ Gunboat Diplomacy” , to the point we would have a sweepstake on how many times he would say it .
And a very nice man to boot. Sadly he passed away several years ago after having become the temporary headmaster. Wrote several highly acknowledged history books as well. Much missed.
Sad to hear that . I seem to remember he was a national expert on Wars of Roses .... and drinking , like most of the Grammar School history department.
Haha i remember Alchorn well. He was a bit of a bore, but basically put all the notes you needed on the board. Our 'Gunboat Diplomacy' with him was 'Orange Peel.'
He was a good humoured guy outside of lessons and passionate about his subject.
I had left by the time Mr Hart retired. At his leaving assembly at the end of term, but my younger bro was there and recounts that the whole school stood up for an impromptu and long standing ovation with cheers to overrule the stifled handshake and goodbye that was planned.
I remember getting sent to Hart's office on a couple of occasions. He always appreciated that i took being caught with grace and didn't try to worm my way out of it. He dished out a green card and said 'boys will be boys.' None of the lecturing and overblown moralistic preaching of some teachers.
Yep, Neil Hart was a fantastic history teacher and knew how to engage the interest of those who were less interested than they might have been. I remember how he got over to a couple of lads in our set the dilemma facing William of Normandy when he landed in 1066. He phrased it as Harold Godwineson only needing a 0-0 home draw to win the 1st Division, whilst William needed a 4-0 away win. It was amazing to see how much more involved they became after that.
In 1973, during an after-school History Society meeting at which a learned professor was giving a presentation, the discussion briefly turned to an environmental campaign with the slogan ‘plant a tree in 73’. About 5 minutes after the digression had finished, Neil suddenly piped up with ‘plant some more in 74’ and then proceeded to laugh so much at his own joke, he tipped his chair over.
Must have had good genes, cos his daughters were absolute stunners.
OK,I will bite - why would a 1-0 away win not have sufficed?
Well, yes. I meant why did that analogy provide a possible basis for understanding the nature of the challenge facing the Normans.
Was he getting at disparity in army sizes, resources, supply chains etc?
PS wasn't it goal average in those days?
Time Team returns….
Ordered this last night:
Also been enjoying the 'Ten Minute History' series on YouTube. Very high level but interesting nonetheless and good for filling gaps in knowledge. There's a playlist on YT with 199 of their videos in order.
For William, absolutely everything depended upon winning a massive victory on foreign territory whilst facing a combination of extremely difficult challenges.
He had to commit to all-out attack very early on. For Harold, even managing not to be overwhelmingly defeated in the battle William managed to force would have been enough. A marginal defeat that left an acceptable rump of his army intact, with him himself remaining alive, would have made William's position almost untenable. A 'replay' or 'play-off' would have been effectively worthless for William, but not for Harold.
There is no evidence of a massive disparity between army sizes, whilst the terrain on which the battle was fought went a long way to neutralising the impact of Norman cavalry, which had not yet fully developed the technique of the mass charge with couched lance anyway. One major difference was that William's army contained many more archers than Harold's, which proved vital whether or not we accept that Harold was killed by an arrow in the eye.
Supply lines would have become an issue for William sooner or later, whilst there is also the suggestion that Harold had planned to send a naval force to destroy William's fleet, cutting off his escape. He fully realised if he did not win a major victory within a couple of weeks of landing, he would probably die in England.
Quite how/why Harold decided to offer him battle as soon as he did is a whole different discussion.
And yes, it was average not difference back then! How time flies!
Perfect explanation and I now fully understand the analogy!
80 years ago today HMS Hood blew up and sank with just 3 survivors
I enjoyed her programme,it was on Medusa which Mr IBB found very amusing.
I have no idea why!
To be honest, probably not that exciting. Just a few hundred thousand years of waddling, huddling, eating fish and laying eggs.
Might there be a chapter on "put your tennis ball between your feet,like a baby penguin" as I tell the little players?
I hope so.
It might pad it out a bit,that and a chapter on biscuits.
Did Odd Arne Westad make up the Malmo midfield v Nottingham Forest?
And the tap dancing era.
Difficult for them to attach the shoes to their feet in fairness.
Bismark and Prinz Eugen did a number on her that's for sure. Is that the last picture of the Hood? I believe it is.
It is yes. Taken from HMS PoW.
Didn't the Prince of Wales still have civilian contractors on her when she engaged the Bismark with the Hood?
Sadly she was sunk by the Japanese later in the war.
She did yes, she had only recently been completed and was having problems with the hoists bringing shells up from the magazines.
I recently read she took a shot from Bismark which entered the hull below the armoured belt and ended up near one of the boilers but didn't explode. It so she was extremely lucky.
Got a £20 amazon voucher burning a hole in my pocket. I was looking at this (odd that I know more of/about their language than I do of their history) has anyone read it and was it any good:
Not read the one by Morris, although I have read his "The Norman Conquest" and "A Great and Terrible King" (about Edward I) & found them both good. I always thought of his real scope of expertise being as the above suggest: 11th through to 14th century, so not sure of his 5/6th century credentials.
I'd recommend starting with some earlier 'classics' such as Myers' "The English Settlements" and the relevant chapters of Stenton's all-time classic "Anglo-Saxon England" (both from the Oxford History of England series) & maybe Dorothy Whitelock's "The Beginnings of English Society" or H.R. Loyn's "Anglo-Saxon England & The Norman Conquest". I'd expect Morris' work to cover much of the same ground but with the benefits of more recent study refining the conclusions (or not!) of the earlier ones.
Natalie Haynes topic was Pandora today.
That's exactly what's putting me off hitting the 'buy' button.
But not very funny.