Showing posts with label england. Show all posts
Showing posts with label england. Show all posts

Monday, January 30, 2017

Love and marriage in medieval England

A medieval couple being married by a clergyman. Central miniature, folio 102v. Book IV by Henricus von Assia (13th century). Chapter Archive of Tarazona, Spain. (Photo by PHAS/UIG via Getty Images)




Getting married in the medieval period was incredibly simple for Christians living in western Europe – all they had to do was say their “I do’s” to each other. But, as Sally Dixon-Smith reveals, proving that you were actually married and had not tripped up on the many potential ‘impediments’ to marriage might be another thing altogether

Medieval marriage practice continues to influence ceremonies today – from banns the reading three times of your intention to marry to declaring vows in the present tense. Indeed, the word ‘wedding’ itself even dates from the period.  However, some things were very different…


In the Middle Ages, getting married was easy for Christians living in western Europe. According to the church, which created and enforced marriage law, couples didn’t need the permission of their families or a priest to officiate. However, while tying the knot could take a matter of moments, proving that you were wed often proved difficult. 

Although the church controlled – or tried to control – marriage, couples did not need to marry in a church. Legal records show people getting married on the road, down the pub, round at friends’ houses or even in bed. All that was required for a valid, binding marriage was the consent of the two people involved. In England some people did marry near churches to give greater spiritual weight to proceedings, often at the church door (leading to some rather fabulous church porches being added to earlier buildings), but this still did not necessarily involve a priest.  

Marriage was the only acceptable place for sex and as a result Christians were allowed to marry from puberty onwards, generally seen at the time as age 12 for women and 14 for men. Parental consent was not required. When this law finally changed in England in the 18th century, the old rules still applied in Scotland, making towns just over the border, such as Gretna Green, a destination for English couples defying their families. 


Although the medieval church upheld freely given consent as the foundation of marriage, in practice families and social networks usually had a great deal of influence over the choice and approval of marriage partners. It was also normal at all levels of society to make some ‘pre-nup’ arrangements to provide for widow- and widowerhood and for any children. It was also expected that everyone would seek the permission of their lord, and kings consulted over their own and their children’s marriages. Marriage between people of different classes was particularly frowned on. 


The wedding of saints Joachim and Anne, considered to be the parents of Mary, the mother of God. Codex of Predis (1476). (Photo by Prisma/UIG/Getty Images)
There were various ways in which a medieval couple could use words or actions to create a marriage. Consent to marry could be given verbally by ‘words of present consent’ – no specific phrase or formula was required. A ‘present consent’ marriage did not have to be consummated in order to count. However, if the couple had agreed to get married at some point in the future and then had sex, this was seen as a physical expression of present consent. 

So, for engaged couples, having sex created a legally binding marriage. Consent could also be shown by giving and receiving an item referred to English as a ‘wed’. A ‘wed’ could be any gift understood by those involved to mean consent to marry but was often a ring.  A ‘wedding’ where a man gave a woman a ring and she accepted it created the marriage. 

It is clear that there were misunderstandings. It could be difficult to know if a couple was married and they might even not agree themselves. The statutes issued by the English church in 1217–19 include a warning that no man should “place a ring of reeds or another material, vile or precious, on a young woman's hands in jest, so that he might more easily fornicate with them, lest, while he thinks himself to be joking, he pledge himself to the burdens of matrimony”. The vast majority of marriage cases that came up before the courts were to enforce or prove that a marriage had taken place.

Marriage mix-ups bothered the clergy since, after much debate, theologians had decided in the 12th century that marriage was a holy sacrament. The union of a man and a woman in marriage and sex represented the union of Christ and the church, and this was hardly symbolism to be taken lightly. 

As God was the ultimate witness, it was not necessary to have a marriage witnessed by other people – though it was highly recommended to avoid any uncertainty. There was also a church service available, but it was not mandatory and the evidence suggests that only a minority married in church. Many of those couples were already legally married by word or deed before they took their vows in front of a priest.  


Divorce as we understand it today did not exist. The only way to end a marriage was to prove it had not legally existed in the first place. Christians could only be married to one person at a time and it was also bigamy if someone bound to the church by a religious vow got married. As well as being single and vow-free, you also had to be marrying a fellow Christian. Breaking these rules automatically invalidated the marriage.


The marriage feast at Cana, early 14th century. Below, in an initial letter 'S', the throwing overboard and casting up of Jonah. From the Queen Mary Psalter, produced in England. Illustration from School of Illumination, reproductions from manuscripts in the British Museum, Part III, English 1300 to 1350, (British Museum, Longmans, Green and Co, London, 1921). (Photo by The Print Collector/Print Collector/Getty Images)
There were also a number of other ‘impediments’ that should prevent a marriage going ahead, but might be waived in certain circumstances if the marriage had already taken place. Couples who were already related were not to marry. The definition of ‘family’ was very broad. Before 1215, anyone with a great-great-great-great-great-grandparent in common was too closely related to get married. As this rule was hard to enforce and subject to abuse – the sudden discovery of a long-lost relative might conveniently end a marriage – the definitions of incest were changed by the Fourth Lateran Council in 1215, reduced to having a great-great-grandparent in common. 

As well as blood kinship, other ties could also prohibit marriage. For instance, godparents and godchildren were not allowed to marry as they were spiritually related, and close ‘in-laws’ were also a ‘no-no’.

Reading the ‘banns’ was introduced as part of the 1215 changes to try to flush out any impediments before a marriage took place. Nevertheless, until the Reformation there was no ‘speak now or forever hold your peace’. 


It is difficult to know how many medieval people married for love or found love in their marriage. There was certainly a distinction between free consent to marry and having a completely free choice. What is clear is that the vast majority of medieval people did marry and usually remarried after they were widowed, suggesting that marriage was desirable, if only as the social norm.

Other articles on the same theme:





Story source: 
The above post is reprinted from materials provided by Historyextra . Note: Materials may be edited for content and lengt

Friday, January 13, 2017

The death of Ragnar Lodbrok and his sons' vengeance in the last episodes from season 4

When king Ælla of Northumbria learns of the pillaging army, he musters an overwhelming force and defeats Ragnar's army. Ragnar is dressed in a silken jacket which Aslaug had made and nothing can pierce it. Finally, he is taken prisoner and thrown into a snake pit. However, as the snakes do not bite him, the Englishmen take off his clothes and then the snakes kill him for good.

Ragnar's sons attack England but Ivar does not want to fight as the English army is too large; he fears they will lose and will have to go home again. Ivar, however, stays in England and asks Ælla for wergild, claiming that he can not go home without some compensation to show his brothers.


King Ælla of Northumbria (Ivan Kaye) photo: wikia
Ivar only asks for as much land as he can cover with an ox's hide. He cuts it into such a fine long string of hide that he can encircle an area large enough for a city. When this is done, he lays the foundations for a city which becomes York. He allies himself with all of England and finally all the chieftains in the region become loyal to Ivar and his brothers.

Then, Ivar tells his brothers to attack England. During the battle Ivar sides with his brothers and so do many of the English chieftains with their people, out of loyalty to Ivar. Ælla is taken captive and in revenge Ragnar's sons carve the blood eagle from him.

Ivar becomes king over north-eastern England which his forefathers owned (i.e. Ivar Vidfamne and Sigurd Ring), and he has two sons, Yngvar and Husto. They obey their father Ivar and torture king Edmund the Martyr and take his realm.


An 1857 painting by August Malmström depicting King Aella's messenger before Ragnar Lodbrok's sons. photo: wikipedia

Ragnar's sons pillage in England, Wales, France and Italy, until they come to the town of Luna in Italy. When they come back to Scandinavia, they divide the kingdom so that Björn Ironside has Uppsala and Sweden, Sigurd Snake-in-the-Eye has Zealand, Scania, Halland, Viken, Agder, all the way to Lindesnes and most of Oppland, and Hvitserk receives Reidgotaland (Jutland) and Wendland.

Sigurd Snake-in-the-Eye marries king Ælla's daughter Blaeja and they have a son named Harthacnut, who succeeds his father as the king of Zealand, Scania and Halland, but Viken rebels and breaks loose. Harthacanute has a son named Gorm, who is big and strong but not as wise as his ancestors.

Other articles on the same theme:










Story source: 
The above post is reprinted from materials provided by Wikipedia. Note: Materials may be edited for content and length.

Thursday, January 12, 2017

Henry VIII: One of the most controversial figures in European history (Explosive anger, headaches, insomnia, memory problems, inability to control impulses, and even impotence)

Henry, c. 1531 photo: wikipedia
Updated 12/05/2020

He is one of the most controversial figures in European history, best remembered for executing two of his six wives and for breaking away from the Catholic Church in what became known as the Reformation. Now, a new study concluding that Henry VIII suffered brain damage caused by a jousting injury offers the strongest explanation of his erratic behaviour “short of miraculously finding his preserved brain in jar,” its lead author has claimed.

Henry VIII (1491-1547) - HistoryExtra
According to a team of US researchers led by Dr Arash Salardini, behavioural neurologist and co-director of the Yale Memory Clinic, the Tudor monarch may have suffered repeated traumatic brain injuries similar to those experienced by American Football players. This, researchers claim, would explain Henry’s explosive anger, headaches, insomnia, memory problems, inability to control impulses, and even impotence.

Published by Yale Memory Clinic, a memory and cognitive clinic at Yale School of Medicine, the study claims that “Henry suffered from many symptoms which can unambiguously be attributed to traumatic brain injury”.

Arash Salardini Yale School of Medicine - Yale University


In an interview with History Extra, Dr Salardini said: “I thought [Henry] was a man with personality disorder, possibly narcissistic with sociopathic tendencies who had some form of mood disorder later on his life and took it out on his subjects. That is not what I ended up finding.”

Dr Salardini said the researchers went into the study with an open mind, originally writing it as a case report exploring the probability of the various diseases that Henry might have suffered. However, Salardini and his team were surprised to find that “the picture was so consistent with the sequel of chronic concussion, intellectual honesty would dictate writing about traumatic brain injury in Henry.”

Taking a neurological, rather than a historical, approach, the researchers “gathered data about the patient and localised most of the symptoms to the frontosubcortical circuitry neural pathways that affect memory, organisation and behavioural control]and the pituitary the gland that controls hormones”.


From this “an anatomical and pathologically consistent medical timeline emerged which I think should be the strongest evidence in support of the concussion, short of miraculously finding [Henry VIII’s] preserved brain in a jar”, said Salardini.


King Henry VIII in a procession on his way to a tournament clad in armour and riding a horse, 1511. He is accompanied by courtiers who are holding the flaps of a tent so that the king can be seen. (Photo by Hulton Archive/Getty Images)
In the paper, researchers dismissed a number of theories that have been previously been put forward to explain Henry’s changed behaviour from 1536, after which time it is argued that Henry “became cruel, petty and tyrannical”. These include diabetes, hypothyroidism and psychosis – none of which, researchers claim, “can account for the whole picture”.

Instead the paper argues that “traumatic brain injury could have caused diffuse axonal injury a common brain injury in which the wires that connect the cells in the brain become damaged which led to a change in the psychological makeup of Henry, and traumatic brain injury may have contributed to his other medical issues by causing pituitary dysfunction and endocrinopathies (hormone problems).”

Did the "Dogs Lick Henry's Blood" After His Funeral?

The paper explains: “We know of at least three major head injuries in Henry’s life. He may have had headaches and more subtle changes to his personality after his first head injury [in March 1524, when the king was unseated after a jousting lance entered his open visor], but there is a marked stepwise change in him after 1536. It is entirely plausible, though perhaps not provable, that repeated traumatic brain injury lead to changes in Henry’s personality.”

The team examined Henry’s memory problems, headaches, insomnia and lack of impulse control. Of his memory problems, researchers said: “In July 1536, Henry’s son and possible heir Henry FitzRoy, Duke of Richmond and Somerset, died of tuberculosis. He was buried in near-secret in the presence of his father-in-law the Duke of Norfolk, and two other personages, by the king’s own instructions. Yet in a few days Henry appears to have forgotten his own role in the funeral and was accusing the Duke of Norfolk of inappropriate behaviour towards FitzRoy.


Was Henry FitzRoy, the illegitimate son of Henry VIII, murdered? Spartacus Educational


“There is another illustrative episode which occurred in 1546: the king loved religious debates and during one acrimonious argument between Catherine Parr and [bishop and statesman] Stephen Gardiner he unreasonably ordered the transportation of the queen to the Tower of London. The next day Henry appears to have forgotten about the incident and was consoling his distraught wife. When the soldiers arrived to take her away, he could not remember the original orders he had given and had to be prompted to remember the episode. When he remembered he flew into another fit of rage.”
Armour for field and tournament of King Henry VIII, 1540 (metal), possibly intended for the May Day tournament, 15 May 1540. Decorated by Giovanni di Maiano or Francis Quelblaunce; based on designs by Hans Holbein the Younger. (Royal Armouries, Leeds, UK / Bridgeman Images)

Turning to Henry’s behaviour, the researchers claim: “The irascibility and changeability of Henry was a source of constant anxiety for Tudor courtiers. Several ambassadors noted the unpredictability of Henry, who was often furious for reasons not immediately obvious to his ministers and advisers.” Henry was also “known to suffer from bouts of ‘mal d’esprit’ or depression with ‘self-pity and more than traces of gloom’”, the paper says.

Discussing Henry’s possible impotence, the researchers cite “rumours which apparently originated with Anne Boleyn and her brother according to Chapuys, the imperial ambassador for the Holy Roman Empire. Anne and George Boleyn were accused of ridiculing the king. Anne appears to have told her sister-in-law that Henry ‘was not adept in the matter of coupling with a woman and that he had neither vertu (skill) nor puissance (vigour)’”.


Anne Boleyn - Wikipedia
A Death Warrant from King Henry VIII Stephen Liddell


The paper also draws on “the inability of Henry to consummate his marriage to Anne of Cleves in 1540. Various excuses were made from ‘misliking of her body for the hanging of her breast and the looseness of her flesh’, to the charge that the king was duped by an unnecessarily complimentary portrait of Anne.” Impotence and weight gain, Dr Salardini told History Extra, “also fit with a growth hormone and sex hormone deficiency which is a known, but less common, manifestation of traumatic brain injury.”

In our interview with Salardini we asked how Henry VIII’s brain injury would be treated were he alive today. “The best treatment for traumatic brain injury is prevention, so wearing helmets was as important then as it is now,” he said. “It was advisable for the king, who seemed particularly accident-prone, to choose a more gentle sport.  

“Secondly, early management of mood regulation appears to be a useful intervention. If St John's wort was available in Henry's time then I would put him on a gram per day. He would also need to take up the Mediterranean diet of his enemies and have complex carbohydrates, monounsaturates and low-fat diet.




“Our knowledge has come a long way since the 16th century, but much of the therapeutics that we have today could have probably be reproduced back then.”


Other articles on the same theme:









Story source:
The above post is reprinted from materials provided by Historyextra. Note: Materials may be edited for content and length.

Friday, January 6, 2017

1013: The year when the vikings invaded and conquered England

Swein Forkbeard leads the Viking assault on England in this detail from Matthew Paris’s 13th-century Life of St Edward the Confessor. The Danish king was drawn to England by the country’s material riches, says Sarah Foot. (Cambridge University Library)
One thousand years ago this summer, the king of Denmark (and lord also over Norway and Sweden) invaded England with a large fleet. After a brief campaign, he secured the submission of all the English people apart from the inhabitants of London. 

3 Key Battles of the Viking Invasions of England History Hit

When, as a near-contemporary English chronicler reported, “all the nation regarded him as full king”, the citizens of London finally capitulated and submitted, giving the Dane hostages, “for fear that he would destroy them”. 

Sweyn Forkbeard: England's forgotten Viking king - BBC News

That king was Swein Forkbeard. His swift conquest sent the Anglo-Saxons’ native ruler, Æthelred (nicknamed ‘the Unready’) into exile in Normandy, leaving his English subjects to pay a large tribute and supply their conqueror and his army with provisions. 

 
Sweyn Forkbeard photo: wikipedia

How could a foreign adventurer have brought such an abrupt end to the rule of the descendants of Alfred the Great? How could he have reversed the victory Alfred had won over the ninth-century Vikings, and reduced England to a subject realm within 
a Scandinavian empire? 

Southern Britain in the ninth century wikipedia

The story of Swein’s conquest of England goes back to the AD 990s, to one of the most celebrated episodes in early English military history, reported laconically in the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, but commemorated in a famous Old English poem: The Battle of Maldon. In the summer of 991, 
a fleet of more than 90 Viking ships landed in Kent, sailed to Ipswich and, after sacking that town, came into the estuary of the Blackwater river in Essex. 

 
Byrhtnoth's Plaque near Northey Island image wikipedia
Byrhtnoth statue in Maldon, Essex. Hero and loser of the Battle of Maldon in 991 photo: wikipedia

Facing them on the other shore stood the ranks of the english army led by the Ealdorman of Essex, Byrhtnoth. When a Danish messenger called across the water to urge the English to make peace and “buy off this onslaught of spears with tribute-money”, so that they need not “join battle so grievously”, Byrhtnoth stepped forward to speakin response:

The Battle of Maldon Poem

Determining that the “grim game of battle” would arbitrate between them before the English would pay tribute, Byrhtnoth ordered his men to pick up their shields and walk to stand on the edge of the river, where the flood tide flowed, separating the two forces. Only when the waters receded could the seaborne attackers try to take the causeway, which bold English men defended resolutely, refusing to take flight from the ford. 

The perfidious Vikings (as the poem portrayed them) tricked their way into getting Byrhtnoth to yield some ground; he then paid the ultimate price for that act of pride, as the poet saw it, of conceding the Danes too much land. Byrhtnoth fell in the battle, with his last breath commending his soul to the Lord of hosts and of Angels.


Æthelred in an early thirteenth-century copy of the Abingdon Chronicle photo: wikipedia

Hateful visitors

The Maldon poet contrasted the heroism and dedication of Byrhtnoth and those who fell with him – loyal followers of a devout lord – with the disloyal and ungrateful cowards who fled the battlefield on their lord’s death, instead of sacrificing their own lives to avenge him. Danes (“the hateful visitors”) appear as arrogant in their demand for tribute before a blow has been struck; they use guile to gain ground on the English side of the causeway. English valour and moral courage lie at the heart of the poet’s message, but the military prowess of the “fierce” Vikings is never concealed. 

Although the poem did not name any of the hostile army, the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle credited Olaf (Tryggvason) with leading the force that attacked England in 991, implying that he fought at Maldon. But an independent source mentions the involvement of an Essex nobleman in a “treacherous plan that Swein should be received in Essex when first he came there with a fleet”. 


King Olaf I of Norway's arrival to Norway Based on drawing by Peter Nicolai Arbo photo: wikipedia

This suggests that Swein, not Olaf, took the command. Newly established as king in Denmark, with the substantial power and resources of that realm behind him, Swein made a more plausible leader of this invading force than did the Norwegian adventurer Olaf. He would prove a formidable foe. 

Olaf Tryggvason: From a Child Slave to the First Viking Christian BaviPower

After a period of relative peace, Vikings had begun again to attack English shores before Swein and Olaf arrived in 991. Swein’s personal involvement represented a new threat: Denmark’s ruler had his eye on the material resources of England, one of the richest kingdoms of its day. 


Scandinavian adventurers had sought new lands and opportunities in western Europe since the ninth century, but never before had the Danish king himself led their raids. Swein’s ability to spend so much time on overseas expeditions offers an insight into the security of his power at home. The plunder he gathered in England helped to bolster both his resources and his reputation, strengthening his position on both sides of the North Sea.


Spreading misery

Defeated at Maldon, the English paid tribute to the Danes. Further Danish victories followed in the next three years, with attacks on East Anglia, Lindsey, Northumbria, London, Essex, Kent, Sussex and Hampshire until the English again paid tribute. 
 
Statue of Olaf in the city plaza of Trondheim photo: dailyscandinavian.com

At this point, in 994, the English king Æthelred succeeded in separating Swein and Olaf by sponsoring Olaf at his confirmation and giving him royal gifts. In return, Olaf promised never to come back to England in hostility, but took his new wealth to Norway and seized the throne. 

This forced Swein back to Scandinavia to counter the threat to his own realm. While the Danish king sought to reassert control at home (defeating and killing his Norwegian rival in 999), Viking armies continued to harry England, levying large tributes and causing significant misery.

Exeter's History via Maps Images 

Swein first reappears in the English chronicle record when leading the army in an attack on Exeter in 1003, but he may have returned to England as early as 1000. In 1004 he came with his fleet to Norwich, and burned the town down. Fierce fighting near Thetford brought Swein another victory and it seemed no man could defeat him. Then in 1005 a famine struck England, one so bad that the chronicler wrote that “no man ever remembered one so cruel”. Swein was forced to take his fleet back to Denmark. 


Crisis of the Late Middle Ages - Wikipedia

The chronicler, writing from London some time after the events, during the reign of Swein’s son Cnut, laid the blame for the recurrent English defeats firmly on the English leadership. 


To the chronicler’s mind, the incompetence, indecision and cowardice of those in power weakened the morale and determination of the rank-and-file troops, who often crumbled on the battlefield without offering real resistance. So weak were England’s defensive responses that the Danes went about as they pleased: “Nothing withstood them, and no naval force nor land force dared go against them, no matter how far inland they went” (Anglo-Saxon Chronicle)

Anglo Saxon Chronicle photo: wikipedia

Even Æthelred’s drastic strategy of ordering the massacre of all Danish men in England on 
St Brice’s Day in 1002 did little to turn the tide of Danish victory, serving only to heighten the population’s fears.

Although Swein stayed in Denmark after his return in the year of the great famine in England (1005), his absence brought no respite to the English. The arrival in 1009 of the “immense raiding army”, led by Thorkell the Tall, represented a turning point in Æthelred’s reign. Whether, as one source favourable to Swein maintained, Thorkell came as the agent of Swein or (as is more plausible) he led an independent band of warriors, drawn from across Scandinavia, Thorkell’s tactics and military prowess proved more than a match for English defences.

Storm in Hjørungavåg by Gerhard Munthe image wikipedia

Between 1009 and 1012, his army devastated great swathes of England. As the chronicler wrote: 

“All these disasters befell us through bad policy, in that they were never offered tribute in time, nor fought against; but when they had done most to our injury, peace and truce were made with them. And for all this truce and tribute, they journeyed none the less in bands everywhere, and harried our wretched people and plundered and killed them.”

The rune stone U 344 in Orkesta, Uppland, Sweden, was raised by the Viking Ulfr who commemorated that he had taken a danegeld in England with Thorkell the Tall. He took two others with Skagul Toste and Cnut the Great

From an English perspective, the nadir of Thorkell’s campaign came in 1012 following the fall of the city of Canterbury when, on 19 April, his army shamefully put to death Ælfheah, archbishop of Canterbury



Ælfheah of Canterbury photo: wikipedia

In the aftermath of the archbishop’s martyrdom, Thorkell and 45 ships from his army changed sides to ally with Æthelred, promising to defend England.


photo: historyextra
Northern power base 

In 1013, King Swein arrived with his fleet at Sandwich in Kent. He might (as one source maintained) have wanted to punish Thorkell for changing sides. But a close connection between Swein and Thorkell cannot be proven, and other considerations motivated the Danish king, including the desire to now conquer England. 
 
Location of Sandwich. photo: cka.moon-demon.co.uk

From Sandwich, Swein sailed quickly round East Anglia, into the mouth of the Humber and along the Trent until he reached Gainsborough. Without a fight, Earl Uhtred and all the Northumbrians, the people of Lindsey and of the Five Boroughs and all the Danish settlers north of Watling Street submitted to him. This diplomatic victory gave Swein a power base from which to attack Thorkell and Æthelred in the south.

Having provisioned his army, and equipped it with horses, Swein left his son Cnut in charge in Northumbria and crossed Watling Street. Then he allowed his army to do whatever damage it would, intending to subdue the English by fear. His strategy worked. The citizens of Oxford submitted to him and gave him hostages; so did the men of Winchester. 

Only London refused to yield, its citizens resisting because King Æthelred and Thorkell were inside its walls. So Swein turned away to Wallingford, crossed the Thames 
and went to Bath, where he stayed with his army. All the western ‘thegns’ (noblemen) came to submit to him and gave him hostages. 

Now, as the chronicler wrote, “all the nation regarded him as full king”. So it was that the men of London also submitted for fear of what he would do to them. And Swein demanded full payment and provisions for his army that winter. Yet, despite it all, the chronicler lamented, “his army ravaged as often as they pleased”.

King Æthelred escaped to the Isle of Wight where he spent Christmas, and then went into exile with his wife’s people in Normandy. For one short winter, Swein, the king of Denmark and overlord of much of Scandinavia, added England to his empire. 


Isle of Wight in England photo: wikipedia

But on 3 February 1014, Swein died, and the fleet elected Cnut as king. The English then thought better of their own king, their natural lord and begged him to return, “if he would govern them more justly than he did before”. 

It would take two more years of heavy fighting, the death of Æthelred (in April 1016) and of his son Edmund (Ironside) at the end of November that same year, before Cnut would succeed to the whole kingdom of the English and so initiate a period of Danish rule. Cnut’s ultimate victory owed much to the persistence and military prowess of his father, Swein. From the perspective of 1013, it was clear that Byrhtnoth and his companions at Maldon had fallen to the superior military and tactical strength of the most successful king 
of the Viking age.


Who was Swein Forkbeard? 

The rise of the Danish king who subjugated England

Swein was the son of Harald Bluetooth, the first Christian king of Denmark, who had substantially enlarged the Danish kingdom and been accepted as overlord in Norway. Eager to wield power himself, Swein rebelled against his father in AD 987, and drove him into exile. 

Harald Bluetooth being baptized by Bishop Poppo the missionary, probably ca. 960 photo: wikipedia

Such was the stability of the realm that Harold had created that Swein was free to lead raids on England himself, without having to worry about his security at home. And 
his campaign enjoyed 
the support not only of 
his own retainers but also of other leading men from Denmark and elsewhere in Scandinavia, who hoped to profit 
from the treasures 
he would win.
 
Harald's kingdom (in red) and his vassals and allies (in yellow), as set forth in Heimskringla, Knytlinga Saga, and other medieval Scandinavian sources. photo: wikipedia


Swein’s nickname, Forkbeard, is first recorded in a chronicle from Roskilde, compiled about 1140. Most medieval accounts of his career followed the lead given by a German chronicler, Adam of Bremen, who denigrated Swein for failing to recognise the authority of the German emperor and not acknowledging the ecclesiastical authority of the archbishop of Hamburg-Bremen. 


Sweyn and the Jomsvikings at the funeral ale of his father Harald Bluetooth photo: wikipedia

A more positive picture is offered in a text in praise of Emma, widow of Æthelred the Unready, who went on to marry Cnut, Swein’s son. There Swein is praised as a fortunate, generous and religious king.


Other articles on the same theme:












Story source: 
The above post is reprinted from materials provided by Historyextra . Note: Materials may be edited for content and length.

Wednesday, January 4, 2017

The son of an uneducated peasant, became one of the most brilliant scientific minds of all time

Newton, by William Blake; here, Newton is depicted critically as a "divine geometer". This copy of the work is currently held by the Tate Collection photo: wikipedia
Updated today 16/05/2020

Sir Isaac Newton 25 December 1642 – 20 March 1726 was an English mathematician, astronomer, and physicist (described in his own day as a "natural philosopher") who is widely recognised as one of the most influential scientists of all time and a key figure in the scientific revolution. 

His book Philosophiæ Naturalis Principia Mathematica ("Mathematical Principles of Natural Philosophy"), first published in 1687, laid the foundations of classical mechanics. Newton also made seminal contributions to optics, and he shares credit with Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz for developing the infinitesimal calculus.


Isaac Newton. The Mathematical Principles of Natural Philosophy Heritage Auctions

Newton's own copy of his Principia, with hand-written corrections for the second edition photo: wikipedia

Newton's Principia formulated the laws of motion and universal gravitation that dominated scientists' view of the physical universe for the next three centuries. 

By deriving Kepler's laws of planetary motion from his mathematical description of gravity, and then using the same principles to account for the trajectories of comets, the tides, the precession of the equinoxes, and other phenomena, Newton removed the last doubts about the validity of the heliocentric model of the Solar System and demonstrated that the motion of objects on Earth and of celestial bodies could be accounted for by the same principles. 


Adăugați o legendă

Newton's theoretical prediction that Earth is shaped as an oblate spheroid was later vindicated by the geodetic measurements of Maupertuis, La Condamine, and others, thus convincing most Continental European scientists of the superiority of Newtonian mechanics over the earlier system of Descartes.



Descartes_Systems_Group

Newton also built the first practical reflecting telescope and developed a sophisticated theory of colour based on the observation that a prism decomposes white light into the colours of the visible spectrum. 


Illustration of a dispersive prism decomposing white light into the colours of the spectrum, as discovered by Newton photo: wikipedia

Newton's work on light was collected in his highly influential book Opticks, first published in 1704. He also formulated an empirical law of cooling, made the first theoretical calculation of the speed of sound, and introduced the notion of a Newtonian fluid. 

In addition to his work on calculus, as a mathematician Newton contributed to the study of power series, generalised the binomial theorem to non-integer exponents, developed a method for approximating the roots of a function, and classified most of the cubic plane curves.


The first, 1704, edition of Opticks: or, a treatise of the reflexions, refractions, inflexions and colours of light. Author Isaac Newton image wikipedia
John's College, Cambridge Wikimedia Commons

Newton was a fellow of Trinity College and the second Lucasian Professor of Mathematics at the University of Cambridge. He was a devout but unorthodox Christian, who privately rejected the doctrine of the Trinity and who, unusually for a member of the Cambridge faculty of the day, refused to take holy orders in the Church of England



Adăugați o legendă

Beyond his work on the mathematical sciences, Newton dedicated much of his time to the study of alchemy and biblical chronology, but most of his work in those areas remained unpublished until long after his death.  

You may also like: Top 8: Looking for the elixir of immortality.

Politically and personally tied to the Whig party, Newton served two brief terms as Member of Parliament for the University of Cambridge, in 1689–90 and 1701–02. He was knighted by Queen Anne in 1705 and he spent the last three decades of his life in London, where he served as Warden (1696–1700) and Master (1700–1727) of the Royal Mint, as well as president of the Royal Society (1703–1727).


Queen Anne in 1705 image wikipedia






Black Death contributed to one of the most important theories in History

In 1665, following an outbreak of bubonic plague in England, Cambridge University was closed, forcing Newton to return home at Woolsthorpe Manor. While there was in is garden, he saw an apple fall from a tree, an event that inspired him to formulate the famous law of universal gravitation. Newton later told him William Stukeley's incident, the author of his memoirs.


Original tree that inspired Sir Isaac Newton to consider gravitation photo: UniverseToday.com


The tree exists today, and some apple that Newton saw him falling that day, in the garden Woolsthorpe Manor was taken into space in 2010 aboard the Atlantis space.


He was interested in alchemy


Isaac Newton was passionate about alchemy. He has devoted a great deal of time trying to create "Philosopher's Stone" which he believed he had the power to turn other metals into gold and to make people immortal.

photo: likesuccess.com

4. Newton was  a member of parliament

Between 1689 and 1690, Newton was a member of Parliament representing Cambridge University. His contribution was limited. He had spoken only once, when he asked a bailiff to close the window because it was cool. At that time he spent in London, Newton was met with several influential figures of the time, including King William III and philosopher John Locke.


William III of Orange, King of England & Scotland 1650 - 1702 Pinterest




5. He was knighted

In 1705 Newton was knighted by Queen Anne. At the time, he was a wealthy man after his mother inherited properties and published two papers bedside. Newton was buried in Westminster Abbey, the burial place of British monarchs, and other notable individuals who do not belong to the royal family (Charles Darwin, Charles Dickens or explorer David Livingstone).








Invenit Mundo presents the main historical significance of the day January 4:

1809 - He was born Louis Braille, inventor of the writing system for the blind (Braille, 1829) (d. January 6, 1852)



1841 - was born chemist Petru Poni, leading representative of the Romanian school of chemistry. (D. April 2, 1925)



1877 - was born in Brasov, Sextil Puşcariu writer, famous philologist and literary historian, member of the Romanian Academy (d. 1948).

1914 - In Romania formed a government headed by liberal I C I Brătianu, which lasted until January 29, 1918.

1926 - Romania's Parliament voted to accept giving up the throne Prince Charles ( "Act of January 4") and the recognition of his son, Prince Michael, as crown prince of Romania.

1954 - He died poet Elena Farago (Elena Paximade) ( "Puss punished", "Gândacelul" "lame puppy") (n. 29 martie1878)

1960 - A French writer Albert Camus died.

1970 - The actor died Mişu Fotino (father), founder of the State Theatre in Brasov. (N. 1886)

1990 - It was announced the abolition of the State Security Department.

1990 - Held the first press conference of the Group for Social Dialogue (GDS), consisting of personalities from the cultural, artistic and scientific.

1994 - At a meeting of Liberal leaders Horia Rusu and Dinu Patriciu, the PL-93 Steering Committee adopted an "open letter to all the liberal parties" document proposing a "unification through competition liberals".

1996 - Mircea Geoana received the approval of the US administration to take over the post of ambassador to Washington.

1998 - died composer Basil Veselovsky ( "Hope Street," "The sea would know it," "I deserve")

1999 - The miners in the Jiu Valley have joined the general strike, demanding urgent settlement of 30 claims regarding the state of the mining industry.

2004 - The Great Gathering traditional Afghan Loya Jirga adopted the new Constitution "Islamic Republic of Afghanistan".

2006 - He died in Montreal with Alzheimer's, Romanian-born Canadian poet Irving Layton Peter (Israel Pincu Lazarovitch). Since the 40s was recognized as one of the most prolific, versatile, revolutionary and controversial poets of school "modern" Canadian. S reputation was consolidated in the 50s and 60s, especially after the publication of "A Red Carpet for the Sun" in 1959. One of his students was famous Leonard Cohen, musician, writer, promoter of Canadian postmodernism. (B. March 12, 1912, Targu Neamt, Romania).

2008 - The biggest Roma camp in France, located on the outskirts of Paris (Saint-Ouen), was disbanded




Other articles on the same theme:






Story source: 
The above post is reprinted from materials provided by History and wikipedia . Note: Materials may be edited for content and length.