1. Log in now to remove adverts - no adverts at all to registered members!

Arsenal v Lincoln City

Discussion in 'Hull City' started by City Man, Mar 10, 2017.

  1. Barchullona

    Barchullona Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 20, 2012
    Messages:
    29,658
    Likes Received:
    14,737
    Indeed it was. When the spire collapsed the next man made structure to be taller than the Great pyramid was the Eiffel Tower.
     
    #21
  2. Barchullona

    Barchullona Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 20, 2012
    Messages:
    29,658
    Likes Received:
    14,737
    Yes, those hilly places like London and York.
     
    #22
  3. Barchullona

    Barchullona Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 20, 2012
    Messages:
    29,658
    Likes Received:
    14,737
    It had about 6,000 people living there in 150AD. It then went down after various wars and invasions and the departure of the Romans.
    Hull only got to 7,500 in 1700
    You don't have to argue it. It was the third largest city after London and York at the time of the Norman Conquest.Its population of 6,000 was a third of London's. The reason for its next decline was because of a war whose name you would approve of.
     
    #23
  4. Spook

    Spook Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2014
    Messages:
    5,790
    Likes Received:
    1,178
    It was mainly big because it was William the Conqueror's base of operations after 1066 to campaign against the North who were in open rebellion and wanted either a Saxon, Dane or Norwegian on the throne. So he set fire to the North in what only can be described as a medieval genocide from his newly-built castle in Lincoln.
     
    #24
  5. Barchullona

    Barchullona Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 20, 2012
    Messages:
    29,658
    Likes Received:
    14,737
    Lincoln was a large place, relatively, with a population of 6-8,000 when London's was only 18,000 when William the C arrived. It wasn't big because of him. He constructed the castle because the remains of the Roman fortress made it a good place to construct a new castle. Another reason was it was a strategic crossroads of the roads the Romans had originally built.
     
    #25
  6. Spook

    Spook Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2014
    Messages:
    5,790
    Likes Received:
    1,178
    Yeah, I know, Lincoln's size was always owed to the strategic importance of the Roman fortress. It was why the Danes colonised it with other East Midland territories and formed a confederacy of towns or burghs called the Five Boroughs of the Danelaw. In Anglo-Scandinavian England Lincoln was just another burgh like Nottingham or Derby. William's castle made it more important after 1066 and was the main base of operation to suppress Northumbrian rebellion.

    In a alternative history scenario, if Harald Hardrada and Harold Godwinson formed a Anglo-Norwegian alliance instead of killing each other in East Yorkshire, they definitely would've thrown the Norman **** back into the sea. They then could've partitioned England so Hardrada ruled in the North and Godwinson in the South and if one died the other inherited the entire kingdom like the agreement between Canute and Edmund decades before.
     
    #26
  7. Barchullona

    Barchullona Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 20, 2012
    Messages:
    29,658
    Likes Received:
    14,737
    Don't wish to be pedantic or anything but Harold Godwinson wasn't killed in East Yorkshire.

    Surprising how small the armies were back in those days.
     
    #27
  8. Spook

    Spook Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2014
    Messages:
    5,790
    Likes Received:
    1,178
    I was more referencing how the Norwegians and the Anglo-Saxons were killing each other. The Norwegian army was completely crushed and they had about 10,000 men. The Saxons had 15,000, many died in East Yorkshire and by the time they marched all the way back down South they were knackered and easy pickings for the Norman cavalry to break through their ranks. William only had around 10,000 men when he landed and even though the Norwegians and Saxons had no cavalry, 25,000 infantrymen and archers could've easily beaten the Norman army.
     
    #28
  9. Barchullona

    Barchullona Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 20, 2012
    Messages:
    29,658
    Likes Received:
    14,737
    If and buts and maybes. History is full of them. Who knows what the country would have been like if things had gone differently. Maybe Hull would have been a major metropolis with Europe's best supported football team. Though of course it would have had a different name probably.
     
    #29
  10. Spook

    Spook Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2014
    Messages:
    5,790
    Likes Received:
    1,178
    The Norman conquest changed the English course of history irrevocably. I think historians underestimate its impact when compared with the Civil War and the Industrial Revolution. William basically introduced a form of Frankish feudalism alien to Anglo-Scandinavian England. England pre-1066 had an economic model based on allodial property rights rather than feudal property rights, meaning hierarchy existed but there was also a free peasantry, not serfdom. One of my modules actually focuses on feudalism and examines a period from 980 to 1030 in France and parts of Spain called the 'feudal revolution' by historians. There's a lot of debate but the main argument made by the 'revolutionary' perspective is that after Charlemagne's death and the partition of the Carolingian Empire the old public system based on Roman models was eroded and replaced by privatised fiefs and petty lords who were beyond the reach of royal power. It also replaced traditional Germanic tribal law that was more democratic and less stratified than feudalism from 980-onwards. Interesting stuff if you're a history nerd.
     
    #30

  11. Barchullona

    Barchullona Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 20, 2012
    Messages:
    29,658
    Likes Received:
    14,737
    A bit simplistic but the Normans were well organised whilst the Anglo-Saxons were not. Ironic thinking about where they came from. William had a professional army with the promise of spoils if victorious. Harold only had access to a lot of his troops for certain periods revolving around harvests.
    The Battle Of Hastings could have gone either way, the ill-disciplined breaking of ranks to charge down the hill didn't help.
    Strangely enough in a lot of ways archers are more effective firing up a hill than down one.
     
    #31
  12. DMD

    DMD Eh?
    Forum Moderator

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2011
    Messages:
    60,907
    Likes Received:
    50,504
    The terrifying war cry resonated better.

     
    #32
  13. Spook

    Spook Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2014
    Messages:
    5,790
    Likes Received:
    1,178
    William didn't have a professional army. All medieval armies were based on conscription of levies. The Anglo-Saxon levies were based on the fyrd system, whilst the Norman levies were feudal. To put things into perspective, William was a bastard and many of his nobles in the Duchy of Normandy doubted his legitimacy to be duke. He quelled this in some part by claiming when he took the English throne, many of his nobles and knights would be given their own land and titles (fiefs) in England. The Saxons were more organised than you think. Harold Godwinson was waiting in the South with 15,000, waiting for William to land with his inferior numbers. He only marched north when he heard the Norwegians had taken York. Marching his troops north, losing 5000 men and the other 10,000 being exhausted, having to march south again would have certainly taken its toll. The Normans at Hastings didn't even win comfortably with their superiority in cavalry either. They had to resort to cowardly hit and run tactics, feigning retreat and picking off the Anglo-Scandinavian housecarls and then hitting the infantry with their knights. The battle turned when Harold got an arrow in his lamp. A lot of the infantrymen retreated but the remaining housecarls rallied around Harold's body and fought till the end. Even with an army of fresh cavalry, infantrymen and archers the Normans couldn't break through the Saxon ranks until after King Harold died. Piss poor if you ask me.
     
    #33
  14. Barchullona

    Barchullona Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 20, 2012
    Messages:
    29,658
    Likes Received:
    14,737
    A question of semantics. The Normans had at their core a professionally trained bunch of men. This was added to by levies and mercenaries.
    It is estimated William only had 7,000-8,000 troops with him.
    Imagine using a different tactic to win a battle rather than a headlong rush towards the enemy, which worked so well in events like WW1. Those Parthian bastards have a lot to answer for.
    There is some doubt that the story of Harold being killed by an arrow to the eye is correct. It is thought the Normans charged him and hacked him to death and the Normans put forward the story he was hit by an arrow as it was a random thing and could be construed as an act of God. We will never know.

    Do you have a direct line of ancestry back to the Godwinsons? You seem to be awfully incensed by the Normans.<laugh>
     
    #34
  15. Spook

    Spook Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2014
    Messages:
    5,790
    Likes Received:
    1,178
    No, my Yorkshire ancestry stretches back to before the Industrial Revolution. For medievalist historians, due to feudalism and serfdom, if your ancestors were in the same geographic location before the industrial, it's likely they would have been in the same area prior to 1066. So, for most people who has ancestors in Hull and East Yorkshire, that means we have a mix of Northumbrian Angle and Danish heritage. My nana and grandad did a family tree and they managed through a lot of effort to go back as far as the 18th century and they had family in East Yorkshire, plus both their surnames are of Old Norse origin. My problem with the Normans is mostly because they committed a genocide that even by medieval standards was horrific and because in a class-divided Britain, studies have shown those with Norman ancestry are significantly wealthier than others without Norman ancestry. Post 1066 the Normans essentially created something akin to economic and linguistic apartheid until well into the 14th century and even then they still maintained their economic dominance. Just look at all the ****s in the upper echelons of British society; all have poncey French names.
     
    #35
  16. Ernie Shackleton

    Ernie Shackleton Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 21, 2013
    Messages:
    11,310
    Likes Received:
    18,984
    Don't forget Water Tanks for Mesopotamia. Them things were developed and built in Lincoln. Changed the face of battlefield strategy in the mid twentieth century them things did.

    And prisons. Lincoln was at the forefront of denying people human contact as a punishment. Even built a chapel where no prisoner can see anyone else except the geezer in the pulpit. Considered the height of restorative justice in the nineteenth century.

    Drove 'em all mad, mind.


    Hanging. That's another thing Lincoln excelled at. They were drawing massive crowds for that 250 years before their football team reached an FA Cup quarter final.


    Very historical place, Lincoln. Give it a go. It's only about an hour away for most of youse lot.
     
    #36
    Happy Tiger likes this.
  17. Chazz Rheinhold

    Chazz Rheinhold Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2011
    Messages:
    53,750
    Likes Received:
    43,954
    What was that nightclub called in Lincoln??
    You paid 20 quid or summat and drinks were free(no wham singing now Ernie)
    Went on a coach trip and a load of the local ****ers were waiting for us with rocks. Running battles ensued. Got a right shiner.
     
    #37
  18. PoolTiger

    PoolTiger Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2011
    Messages:
    595
    Likes Received:
    85
    It's like watching a tennis match between Spook Sampras and Barc Murray but very informative <hug>
     
    #38
    Howden Tigress likes this.
  19. Ernie Shackleton

    Ernie Shackleton Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 21, 2013
    Messages:
    11,310
    Likes Received:
    18,984
    Passed me by that one Chazz. The only drinking I've ever done in Lincoln has been very civilised. Quaint ye olde pubbe type places, wine bars, aperitifs, spritzers, digestifs, girls called Libby and JoJo, rugger types, gap yar chaps, blazers, boaters, Pimm's, plums in mouths, weekends at the Blythe-Spirits little place, walking the hounds, stalking the deer, shall we take the four wheel drive or the soft top? It is the countryside. Rangey it is then, types.


    Oh, wait a minute was it Club Tropicana?


    Best club I ever staggered into after City away was The Pink Flamingo in Newport after a one one draw in 1984.

    Part of my soul still remains there.
     
    #39
  20. TIGERSCAVE

    TIGERSCAVE Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2015
    Messages:
    13,949
    Likes Received:
    11,267
    Lincoln have no chance ... Anthony Taylor is in charge.. having said that any 'known' referee would not work for them.
     
    #40

Share This Page