Normans

[NormanPain]

Hello all, I was wondering what opinions you all have on the Normans, or any facts you would like to share as they are a people I have much interest in and would like to learn more about. I am descended of a Norman Knight as I found in my family tree and that same family line leads to Sir Henry Vane, the Knight who accepted the frech king's surrender at Poitiers by accepting the king's golden gauntlets which after the battle showed up on the Vane coat of arms. I have much interest in the Normans though and I would like to know what you all think about them. I hope to hear from some of you soon, also do not forget that Hastings in 1066 was not their only victory nor their only military campaign. Anyway, I have things to do so I will be back to post again later, take care all.

[katank]

normans are certainly quite interesting and an adventurous lot form what I gathered in conquering Britain but also ruling Sicily for a period.

The latter I did not know until I started playing MTW and then found out.

Hmm, the names in MTW doesn't reflect this though as you should have prince Williams instead of Aeds.

[NormanPain]

They conquered Sicily and half of what is now Italy(the southern half) But I dont believe that was around the time of William or his son, i think it was under henry...I need to check on that, I will post again later on this. For somereason even in VI MTW lacks the Normans...somewhat frustrating. I have to go for now...I will post later.

[Don Corleone]

Okay, just to check to make sure we've covered the obvious bases....

The Normans got their name from 'Norsemen'. They were hired by the Holy Roman Empire (back when it covered France, Germany and Poland) to keep the Vikings from raiding the Norman coast. If you think about it, this was pretty clever, what better way to keep those pesky Vikings out than to give the entry way to one of the worst of those pesky Vikings and make him a feudal lord.

That being said, it obviously didn't work out all that well. One of the HRE died and ceded his kingdom into thirds to one of each of his three sons (what's now mostly France, what's now Germany, and what's now Austria, Hungary, Czech and Poland). Not sure if this is the reason why the Normans instituted the oldest son gets everything, all others get shite but they certainly capitalized on it. They tore up the French kingdom (which, for the record is why the 'English' were scaring the hell out of the French king, even though technically, the King of England was the vassal of the King of France). Have no idea how they took Sicily and Naples, but I'd love to learn.

[Don Corleone]

See, funny thing about the Vikings. We always portray them as bloodthirsty raiders, but they really didn't like to do that kinda crap. If a Jarl had to call his freemen up and say well boys, crops didn't come in right, we gotta go raid, it was viewed as something of a failure on his part to plan properly. See, you have to remember, they're sailing up waterways in open boats. While they tried to go for surprise, they knew how risky their activities were. They could get caught, they could lose, they could get stranded by the tide in a place they didn't know, they could get lost in a storm..... Their legal rules for property basically only recognized the right of freewomen to own land, because so many probate fights broke out when Olaf didn't come home, but then, neither did his brothers Thor and Sven. They actually tried really hard to cover their winter nut any way they could without raiding... they preferred to trade, but they were also known as some of the best mercenaries in the world. Interesting thing about our notion of warrior cultures... almost all of the ones we think of as being kick-ass, bad mofos were actually matriarchal. Losing that many men that often really screws up the the whole inheritance flow. The Vikings, the Spartans, even the Pawnee Indians, all gave property ownership to the women.

[NormanPain]

Ok from what I can gather the Normans were at first hired as mercinaries to help a group of rebels in the early 11th century fight for their freedom against the Byzantines...this contingent of Normans was later slaughtered at cannae in 1018 where only 10 of the original 250 Norman knights survived due to the fact that they were profusely outnumbered(maybe they should have read of Hannibal's victory at the same field centuries before.) overall norman conquest of this area took seventy years as there was no massive military campaign but rather it was taken more by getting as many of their people in places of power as they could. Eventually so many normans had been hired as mercinaries that in 1091 when they claimed ownership no one argued do to the fact they already had a military there that the people themselves payed for so...tough shit for the Italians I guess.

The citizens if the town(Venosa)saw these unfamiliar Knights and wondered at them and were afraid as a writer commented on first seeing the Normans in Italy.

About the vikings...not only did their women run their society but they also got to choose their husband and the men werent really allowed to argue...also most people forget that the Vikings were making a fabulous fortune on trade...bringing the wonders of the world to europe.

Anyways...I have other threads to check on so...anymore comments would be great(and thank you for the ones so far, I have learned a thing or two)I'd like to keep this discussion going, maybe find people who share my interest in the Normans.

[PseRamesses]

@Don Corleone,
Good insights on the Vikings. Couldn´t have said it better myself.

[Accounting Troll]

The Irish were the ones who discovered the Faroes and Iceland. The first Vikings in both places encountered Irish monastic retreats, and they probably found out about them from their raids on Ireland.

Norman Influence in England predates the Battle of Hastings. Edward the Confessor had a lot of Norman favourites, who were resented by the English because of their fondness for building castles. In those days, the English understood the need to build town walls, but castles were thought of as a tool of oppression.

In the year 1066, William the Conqueror was probably merely seen as one of several rival claimants to the English throne - he had married into the English royal family, and England had been under the rule of a foreign born king (Canute) not so long previously. William the Conqueror was accepted as King after his rivals had all died in battle. It was not until he replaced most of the Anglo-Saxon nobility with his countrymen, raised taxes, and started replacing English law with his own that rebellions started. However, the rebellions were led by Anglo-Saxon nobles who simply wanted compensation for the estates that wrere lost, and they had no plans for the liberation of the English peoples.

The conquest and control of England was an impressive feat as the Normans were always a tiny minority, like the British in India

Overall, I would say that the Norman invasion was bad for England. The invasion resulted a lot of oppression, including the notorious Forest Laws, and the genocidal 'Harrying of the North', where the bulk of the population of Northern England was slaughtered following a failed uprising. Before 1066, England had become prosperous through trade, which was why William the Conqueror wanted to rule it. Things didn't improve in England until Henry II created a new legal system based on the better points of Roman and Anglo-Saxon law, which became the forerunner of the modern British and American justice systems.

I think that the Norman conquests in the Mediterranean and Ireland were both spearheaded by private adventurers, however Ireland was close enough for Henry II to insert some royal control, as he didn't want Strongbow to become powerful enough to threaten him one day.

[NormanPain]

You all seem to be well informed, Im glad there is people here who share my interests. I dont have much time to post right now but I do have a question, how long does it take to become a Senior Patron?

[Don Corleone]

There's not really a set amount of time or posts. It's more a matter of the moderators wait around to see that you're responsive and that 1) you're not going to lose interest and drop out (overhead on their servers) and 2) you're not going to go crackpot and chew somebody out. Don't worry, Gregoshi sees all http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/gc-stunned.gif and one of these days, he'll get around to opening up your membership.

There was a funny post on here onetime from some guy who said you have to post all the time, you have to post on multiple topics and the best, you have to have so many logged instances of you helping newcomers. It was a hoot.

[NormanPain]

I see...makes sense...thank you for the help.

[NormanPain]

Today I would like to add a poem written by the Normans about warfare:

I love the gay eastertide, which brings forth leaves and flowers; and I love the joyous songs of birds, re-echoing through the copse. But also I love to see, amidst the meadows, tents and pavilions spread; and it gives me great joy to see, drawn up on the field, knights and horses in battle array; and it delights me when the scouts scatter people and herds in their path; and I love to see them followed by a great body of men at arms; my heart is filled with gladness when I see strong castles besieged, and the stockades broken and overwhelmed, and the warriors on the bank, girt about by fosses, with a line of strong stakes, interlaced...Maces, swords, helms of different hues, shields that will be riven and shattered as soon as the fight begins; and many vassals struck down together; and the horses of the dead and wounded roving at random. And when the battle is joined, let all men of good lineage think of nought but the breaking of heads and arms; for it is better to die then to be vanquished and live. I tell you, I find no such favour in food, or in wine, or in sleep, as in hearing the shout On On from both sides, and the neighing of steeds that have lost their riders, and the cries Help Help; in seeing men great and small go down on the grass beyond the fosses; in seeing at last the dead, with the pennoned stumps of lances still in their sides.

As you can see they were almost completely obsessed with warfare...a little too obsessed.

[Accounting Troll]

How did you find out about your Norman ancestory? Most people who are interested in geneology tend to find that things become little more than guesswork when you get back to about 1850.

Incidentally, it's not difficult to rename an existing faction, suich as the English or Sicilians to the Normans, if you want

[NormanPain]

I dunno, My aunt did it, she worked on it for years...probably was able too trace back that far because kingdoms kept track of knights and such, Mine goes as far back as 1070.

[ShadesWolf]

Erm this is a hard one, you could probably write a book on this subject and many people have.

Where and how do you start ?

Very intersting debate

[Apocalyp$e]

Quote[/b] (Accounting Troll @ April 17 2004,07:08)]In the year 1066, William the Conqueror was probably merely seen as one of several rival claimants to the English throne - he had married into the English royal family, and England had been under the rule of a foreign born king (Canute) not so long previously. William the Conqueror was accepted as King after his rivals had all died in battle.
You mean William the Bastard don't you?

[Mouzafphaerre]

-
Guillaumme de Bâttard http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/tongue.gif
_

[NormanPain]

Actually he wasnt widely called the bastard because a group of people got in a mob outside his house in Normandy starting chanting that he was a bastard and well...he quickly had a number of them rounded up and had their hands and feet cut off. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/gc-yes.gif

[Lord Ovaat]

Whether the Normans were good or bad for Britain would, like anything else, be scewered to the views of the person asked. If we could go back and ask a Saxon, Scot, Welshman, Irishman their views at the time, I'm sure it would put a different spin on the worth of the Normans. I'm sure William I wasn't the first or last Norman accused of single digit parentage. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

[zhang jiao]

i must say i found it very intresting that you were able to trace your family tree back 2 1070, and i would just like 2 no how your aunt found out abit it because i have always wanted to trace my bloodline back to when england had its empire and even further back so if you could ask your aunt where she started maybe i could start there. it would be a great help if you could lend me a hand. thank you very much. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/gc-toff.gif

[Mouzafphaerre]

-
Personally, I can count up to nine generations (#1 being myself) going aby all fathers and something close to that from my mother's paternal ancestors. Four or five is the last in other routes.

That's more than enough to have a wide imperial root extending from the Caucassus to as far as Bosnia.

http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/wave.gif
_

[NormanPain]

Well believe it or not Zhang you may want to start with the mormons...they will help you extensively for free Im told...I would start there...and you might want to check to see if anyone in your family has already done a family tree...If your ancestors in england or anywhere in the world in the middle ages were peasants...it is unlikey that you will be able to trace back that far...It was easier for use due to the fact that there is a line of knights in my ancestory and knighthood is a hereditary title and is recorded as knights were important...though not as important as other aristocratic peoples. I wish you luck Zhang...I hope I helped. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif

[zhang jiao]

thanks very much but i have been told as far as anyone can remeber and has been told that there was always aristocratic peoples in my family (great grandad was told by his father and his father by his ect ect) so hopefuly i have someone important in my bloodline, just like you, but thanks anyways http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/gc-toff.gif

[Accounting Troll]

Have you gone through the national census records? Most museums and libraries have them. Also, old church and military records can be a good source of information, although it does help if you have an unusual surname.

[meravelha]

The Sicilian Normans were great
A bigger gang of crooks you've never seen in your lives.

After capturing the papacy, Roger Guiscard and his rodent sons had nothing less than Constantinople in their sights. See here for overview:

users.actrix.co.nz/moyle/dbits/dbitsp1.html

[bighairyman]

The Normans were the greatest threat to Europe at thier time, They ahd a large fief in Northern France(Normany), the country of england, sicily, and a great navy(i think). But of course they later got slaughter by the Arabs(muslims), who conquered sicily. i think that's right, my history on the Normans are a little rusty.

Didn't the Normans introduce the fief system and some stone castle designes? http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/confused.gif

[Mouzafphaerre]

-
Fief system, no; castle types, yes.

Also, IMS, Muslim sovereignity over Sicilia predates the Norman invasion.
_

[bighairyman]

Quote[/b] (Mouzafphaerre @ April 21 2004,19:50)]-
Fief system, no; castle types, yes.

Also, IMS, Muslim sovereignity over Sicilia predates the Norman invasion.
_
William the conqueror did introduce feudalism to England, or maybe a Norman style, but i think i read that in a textbook. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/gc-lost.gif

[Mouzafphaerre]

-
AFAIK (no expert here), he introduced the political side of feudality. The economic side was already there.

I mean, the fief system was not invented by the Normans. It had for long been established in Europe when they invaded. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif
_

[NormanPain]

The Normans were a result of a mix of Norse and French civilizations which produced a particularly strong mutt...so to speak. You've got a strongly defensive french society mixed with the strongly offensive norsemen(offensive as in the opposite of defensive, not disgusting as they were actually quite civilized.) which gave them a great deal of flexibility and understanding in warfare. Then on top of that they seem to have inherited the insane love for warfare from the norsemen. It is amazing they showed such restraint, they could have conquered much more and unlike most countries when the levy was called up..more then 50% of the people called up would show up, in fact almost all would as fighting was an honor to them.Anways... I have to go, Ill return later, thank you for being so informative. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/gc-2thumbsup.gif