Printable View
A fairly random guess: Leonardo Da Vinci? I vaguely recall the seperation of the spectrum as one of several phenomena said to have been discovered by him, but attributed to later scientists because his notes are so famously obscure and cryptic that it was not realised until much later what he was actually saying.
...That might just as easily be wacky "Da Vinci = Greatest Man in History" propaganda though.
Antagonist
No, the man I am looking for was earlier than da Vinci. He was an astounding teacher.
Although, a case can be made that the teacher's teacher, a bishop and school chancellor, was the one who did the initial experiments which were then merely continued. And there are some contemporaries, a Sufi from Shiraz and a Dominican theologian from Germany, who also did almost exactly the same work at almost exactly the same time.
Now...
Given those three hints, who is going to provide the answer to King Henry V's wonderful question?
Is it Roger Bacon?
Correct, also known as the Doctor Mirabilis, or astounding teacher.
I still think it's possible that Bacon's teacher and mentor, Robert Grosseteste, was the actual source of Bacon's knowledge. He was the Chancellor of Oxford and head of Greyfriars there and Bishop of Lincoln and Bacon's main teacher. He wrote a treatise called De Iride sometime before 1235 on the properties of the rainbow before Bacon wrote his own Opus Majus in 1267. In De Natura Lacorum, Grosseteste has a diagram showing light being refracted through a spherical flask of water. This is exactly the same method Bacon used to demonstrate the properties of the rainbow.
The other two possibilities were:
Theodoric of Freiburg, a Dominican theologian and scientist, who used glass spheres of water to break up light into the rainbow and gave an accurate explanation for primary and secondary rainbows in a work pulished in 1307.
Qutb al-Din al-Shirazi was a Sufi from Shiraz in Persia who also wrote a detailed explanation of how a rainbow is formed at around the same time as Theodoric.
But Roger Bacon is the one who actually widely published the science in the experiment; so to him goes the acknowledgement!
Well done Perplexed. What is your question?
Alright, an easy one:
I'm looking for a 7th century intellectual who was and still is hailed by the title "father of _____" (fill in the blank). He was famous throughout Europe for his wide-ranging knowledge on many subjects, including theology, history, and mathematics.
I've spent a good half hour searching and can't find him.
Closest I can get is Sir Francis Bacon, father of the scientific method, except for the fact that he's a 17th century intellectual.
Sounds tricky. I can think of several people around the 7th Century AD who contributed in one of those fields or other, but all of them?
My first thought was Muhammad - the Father of Islam - who is well-known in Europe and everywhere else, but I don't think he was a historian or a mathematician...
St. Bede the Venerable? He was a pretty accomplished historian and theologian, and I think his influence spread beyond Britain. I think he has been called the Father of English History, too. He would be my guess...
Antagonist
Right. It was the best I could come up with on short notice, sorry if the hints weren't clear enough.Quote:
Originally Posted by Antagonist
I so nearly said Bede, but didn't he die in 793AD (end of the eighth century)?
He was born in the late seventh, but died within the first half of the eighth, so I decided to say seventh, which was probably a bad idea. :embarassed: Sorry about any confusion.Quote:
Originally Posted by Craterus
He did indeed die in the 8th Century IIRC, but quite a bit earlier then 793.
Antagonist
EDIT: I had a question, but double-checking a detail about it on the internet seems to suggest that the book I'm reading makes quite a contentious claim that isn't accepted by most historians, so I'll have to think of something else...
EDIT2: First edit took so long that I didn't notice Perplexed's clarification. Sorry.
Not to worry, on with the questions! ~D
Sorry about this, had a busy day. I really thought I had a great question there, but nevermind. Don't want to leave it any longer though, so here's another fairly easy one off the top of my head from another recently finished book:
To whom is usually attributed the "invention" of the Highland Charge tactic, made famous during the Jacobite Rebellion of 1745?
Antagonist
No one else? Well then...
Being a big fan of the band Clannad, and having just finished listening to the album Lore which has a song about the man on it, I'll give the answer:
Alasdair MacColla
Yes indeed. Quite a formidable fellow it would seem.
(Although truth be told "pioneer" is probably a more appropriate word, I don't think one can "invent" a military tradition that apparently existed in some form for millenia)
Anyway, Aenlic's question. :idea2:
Antagonist
An aside about MaColla before I ask my question. He died at the age of 27. Rather amazing accomplishments in his life for one who died so young. Which book are you reading, Antagonist? I found Stevenson's Highland Warrior: Alasdair MacColla and the Civil Wars for a great price at a local used bookstore; but I thought I'd ask someone who might have read it first.
My question. Hmmm...
Who is generally credited as having first said, Neca eos omnes. Deus suos agnoset?
Bonus questions: Which military leader posed the problem which received that response (and is also credited by some as being the source of the response), in what year, at what town, in what "war"?
Kill'em all, and let God sort'em out" is adopted by the Marines and the Green Berets. I think it derives from "Neca eos omnes. Deus suos agnoset", or "Kill them all. God will know His own.". This was a misunderstood reference to 2 Tim. 2:19 which in part reads, "The Lord knoweth them that are his". I think this comes from around 1210AD, when Pope Innocent III unleashed "orders of fire and sword" against heretics throughout Europe. In this process there was a terrible massacre at the city Beziers, where it was thought that over 100,000 people were killed. After that city where taken, they had captured over 450 "heretics", but many of them claimed to be good Catholics. The quote is believed to be first used here, when they killed all the "heretics". It did not matter if they killed good people, because if one led a godly life, God would know of it, and the reward would be eternal paradise anyway.
Very close, StrikefortheSouth, but I need a name! The name of the person most often attributed as the source of the phrase. And the bonus questions of who the military leader was, what city, what year (the year in your quote there is slightly in error, SftS), and the name of the "War".
Not 100% sure, but I believe the answer is Arnaud Amaury (or something like that) The year was AD 1209 at the seige of Beziers during the Albigensian Crusade against the oh-so-heretical Cathars. I recall the phrase being attributed to several people, but the above is what I was told. He was the Papal Legate overseeing the whole thing IIRC.
Antagonist
You are correct!
The military leader sometimes attributed as the source was Simon IV de Montfort; but Arnaud-Amaury, abbot and head of the Cistercians order and the Papal Legate and spiritual advisor to the Albigensian Crusade, was the more likely source. The date and location are correct, as well. The siege of Beziers, on July 22nd, 1209.
Estimates put the slaughter at Beziers at somewhere between 10,000 and 20,000 men, women and children, most of whom were not Cathars at all (one source puts the estimate of Cathars as about 200 at most). Simon de Montfort was disputably one of the most vicious and bloodthirsty people ever to lead a supposedly religious army. Even the instigator of the crusade, Pope Innocent III, chastised him for killing innocent civilians at one point.
There's a wonderful web site with the salient details and a great bibliography of sources here: http://xenophongroup.com/montjoie/albigens.htm
Your question, Antagonist?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aenlic
*edit* somewhat altered view, thx Aenlic for comment.
would like to add
It was Caesarius von Heisterbach, who wrote it down in his Dialogus Miraculorum, 1219-1223. (he died in 1240). He wrote Arnaud (or Amelric) Amaury, Papal Legate and spiritual leader of the Albigensian Crusade, spoke these legendary words at Béziers, date mentioned above.
"legendary" is an important word here: it is believed by many specialists A.A. might never have spoken these words. A good book on it is (for the ones of you who do know French):
Tuez-les tous Dieu reconnaîtra les siens. Le massacre de Béziers et la croisade des Albigeois vus par Césaire de Heisterbach, by Jacques Berlioz (Loubatières, 1994).
it was a fine question after all...
:idea2: Arch
It may be commonly agreed in the sources which you have, my friend, that the words were never spoken. And yet, EVERY source I have seen says it was Abbot Arnaud-Amaury, with one saying it may have been Simon IV de Montfort instead. The word "legendary" does not necessarily imply imaginary. Eric Clapton is a legendary guitar player; and yet, he would argue with you that he most certainly exists. As you have pointed out, the phrase was written down only a decade or so years after the fact. That hardly makes it a matter of ancient legend and debate. In fact, I'd say that having the attribution made only 10 years after the fact makes it rather more certain than if it had been merely word of mouth traditionally passed down over many centuries. Wouldn't you agree? :wink:
And if you'll take the time to look back at my original question, you'll then find that I did not ask "who said" it. I asked "who is generally credited with having first said it" which is something quite different. I am not claiming that it is an absolute fact; but neither am I claiming, as you are, that it didn't happen. One should be very careful making absolute statements when regarding events which may or may not have taken place, especially when they happened (or did not happen) 800 years ago. :smile:
Agree.
I can't put up many arguments anymore. I should read that book again ;)
About Caesarius v Heisterbach: although it was in the same time, he was German and he wrote his work there. That's the argument some people use to doubt if the words were actually spoken, if i remember well.
You are absolutely right about claiming absolute statements. I can follow you in that. I altered the view :bow:
Next question please?
Agreed, Archayon. In fact, I think our views are probably much closer than it would appear from our posts. My post came off much harsher than I intended, I think. :bow:
There is, as I recall, an account written by one of the actual members of the crusade. I don't recall the name, but I think he was from Normandy, perhaps. I'm certain that he did not mention any such statement; which is a point in favor of it not having happened. As far as I know, all other accounts are apocryphal; which does indeed call into question the veracity of the statement. That's why I was careful not to imply that it actually happened in my question. It is such a wonderfully apt statement for a crusader to make for the period - especially considering the circumstances of that horrible event; so I made it a question.
Let's have a tough question now, Antagonist! Something to stimulate the few active brain cells remaining to me from my misspent youth in the 70's.
Antagonist! Where are you? We need a question. Something good to keep poor StrikefortheSouth out of trouble. :wink:
Many apologies, I've had a busy few days (Yesterday I was fatally injured during a sword-fight with a good-looking young man on top of a giant blimp, last week I was eaten by crocodiles, tomorrow's some anime thing etc., antagonism's a demanding line of work) *cough* Regardless of what I was really doing, I haven't had much time to think about this. This is the kind of time one wishes for command of some obscure subject from which one could draw forth fiendishly difficult questions, but sadly I don't have that.
So I must once again recourse to recent reading: What was the last battle in Western history in which cavalry played a significant role on both sides?
Apologies again,
Antagonist
My guess would be WW1 but I'm not sure.
Nah, cavalry was pretty much utterly useless up against the machine-guns, rifles and artillery. It's not a battle, anyway.
Hmm, I'm not sure. The latest reference to cavalry in modern-ish history I can find is in 1911, during the Italo-Turkish war. The Arabic mobile cavalry of the Ottomans encircled the Italians, and came out victorious. The battle was near Tripoli, but I'm not sure about the name. Is it the battle of Tobruk?