Brief round-up of random medieval items…

Posted: January 15, 2010 in hundred years' war

Here’s a few new stories that involve medieval figures in some way…Yes, yes, some of it’s pretty random, but whatever. The Black Prince is the Black Prince is Edward of Woodstock…

Let’s lead off with a great article from Telegraph, about why we’re more interested in the Middle Ages than ever!!!
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/6952220/Why-were-in-the-grip-of-medieval-mania.html

Speaking of the Black Prince, apparently it was one of the early ironclads…
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/dec/31/new-era-dawns-in-naval-warfare/

The Bardi and Peruzzi put in historical economic meltdown perspective. There’s nothing new under the sun.
http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/finance/2009/1231/1224261470650.html

An interesting ramble from a chap who seems to conflate the Hundred Years’ War with the Wars of Religion. And I wonder why my students seem to have trouble grasping the complexities of medieval society.
http://www.gather.com/viewArticle.action?articleId=281474977991420&grpId=3659174697241980

A recent assessment of the war against fundamentalist terrorist activity somehow manages to mention Bosworth, Castillon, and the Hundred Years’ War. Not too bad on the whole…
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/jan/03/al-qaida-taliban-iran-afghanistan

Henry V (Shakespeare’s version, anyway) becomes a model for CEO’s and business strategists–you see, he “transformed his noisiest and most disruptive doubter into a vociferous supporter” [sic]. That’s one way of looking at the St. Crispin’s Day speech, I guess…
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/01/08/AR2010010803780.html

And lastly, for now anyway, the reference in this short piece to poor farmers getting rich from aristocratic ransoms doesn’t really have it right. YES, theoretically it was possible to have this kind of rags-to-riches story, and military indentures were careful to spell out procedures for prisoner ransoms, exchanges, and reimbursements. In practice archers, especially earlier levies raised by array, often didn’t land the big prisoners, and if they did they would sometimes be obliged to surrender the prisoner, or sell him at a comparative loss to their captain (or sometimes, depending on the prisoner’s status, the king). Not everyone was John Copeland at Neville’s Cross, 1346. And receiving knighthood and some money often had problems of its own, since the new knight still didn’t have the resources to support his position. Sooooo, relating “combat pay” to plunder and ransom is rather over-simplistic. Anyway…
http://www.strategypage.com/htmw/htmoral/articles/20091230.aspx

Ok, this last one was pushing relevancy limits, but whatever. Good night!

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s