Fuck Aye History!

This blog is run by anglophilelizz.tumblr.com

Double-bit Key, 18th centuryEuropeanSteel

Double-bit Key, 18th century
European
Steel


Share/Save/Bookmark

The Songma, Balun Chu Dshi (Abode of God)Tibet
The god Dje Chin has selected this native of Chungtien, the son of a Tonwa bandit chief, as his occasional abode. Whenever he dresses in his Songma robes Balung Dje Chin enters his body and manifests himself by violent fits and shaking. His predecessor killed a lama with a sword while under the influence of Balung Dje Chin.

The Songma, Balun Chu Dshi (Abode of God)
Tibet

The god Dje Chin has selected this native of Chungtien, the son of a Tonwa bandit chief, as his occasional abode. Whenever he dresses in his Songma robes Balung Dje Chin enters his body and manifests himself by violent fits and shaking. His predecessor killed a lama with a sword while under the influence of Balung Dje Chin.


Share/Save/Bookmark

shiro-nakazumi:

Kikuchi Takemitsu (1319-1373)

Takemitsu was the 9th son of Taketoki and continued fighting for the Emperor as his father had done. He was a general of the Nanbokucho era, fighting on the side of the emperor, along with Prince Kanenaga (懐良親王) (1326-1383) (son of Emperor Go-Daigo). The scene where he fights a famous battle on the Chikugo river is drawn in the picture on the right. He was the strongest and most dependable ally of Prince Kanenaga in the struggle against the Bafuku. He was stuck with a triple threat by the armies of Ashikaga Yoshinori, Ashikaga Takasaki and Ashikaga Tadaaki. This made Takemitsu have to raise the siege of Takasaki and address himself to the defence of Daizaifu. The three Ashikaga armies enveoloped Daizaifu and it fell into their hands before the end of September 1372. Takemitsu had to retreat and escaped to Chikugo with Prince Kanenaga. When Takemitsu died he left the loyalist defence without a really tested leader, and his heir Takemasa, a promising soldier, died in 1374.[7]

The Battle of Oohobaru (The Battle of Chikugo River):

Forty thousands which followed Kikuchi Takemitsu as their head advanced northwards from Kikuchi in Kumamoto with Prince Kanenaga, and were opposed to North Dynasty’s Army across the Chikugo River. Kikuchi Takemitu commanded 5000 soldiers to cross the Chikugo River, and pitched a camp around present Miyase. The unit of Kikuchi Takemitsu went along the present Oomuta Railway Line northwards,and headed for Ajisaka. But,forces of the Shouni Family avoided the fight and retreated to the point near present Ooho station. Although, as for this battle line, the stalemate continued for half a month,on the midnight of August 15, Takemitsu finally took the suicide corps of 3000 and moved quietly on the east side of the forces of the Syouni, and attacked it from both sides. In a short while, 1000 horsemen headed by Kikuchi Takemasa arrived there for the help and the Battle of Oohobaru started. Although both armies repeated fierce fight of advance and retreat around Ogoori,the Kikuchi army pressed the Shouni army gradually, the Shouni army retreated along present the Amagi Railway Line toward northeast to arrive at Yamakumahara which spread over present Tachiarai. Although the Shoni army tried to reorganize the disrupted forces at Mt. Hanatateyama, they ran into Mt. Houmanzan 15 kilometers north because they were scattered by the fierce pursuit of the Kikuchi army which didn’t give any spare time for them.[9] 


Share/Save/Bookmark
theoddmentemporium:

Among the many medieval plague victims recently unearthed near Venice, Italy, one reportedly had never-before-seen evidence of an unusual affliction: being “undead. The partial body and skull of the woman showed her jaw forced open by a brick (above)—an exorcism technique used on suspected vampires.
Vampires were thought by some to be causes of plagues, so the superstition took root that shroud-chewing was the “magical way” that vampires spread pestilence. Inserting objects—such as bricks and stones—into the mouths of alleged vampires was thought to halt the disease. MORE.

theoddmentemporium:

Among the many medieval plague victims recently unearthed near Venice, Italy, one reportedly had never-before-seen evidence of an unusual affliction: being “undead. The partial body and skull of the woman showed her jaw forced open by a brick (above)—an exorcism technique used on suspected vampires.

Vampires were thought by some to be causes of plagues, so the superstition took root that shroud-chewing was the “magical way” that vampires spread pestilence. Inserting objects—such as bricks and stones—into the mouths of alleged vampires was thought to halt the disease. MORE.


Share/Save/Bookmark
legrandcirque:

From left to right, Grand Duchesses Olga, Tatiana, Maria, and Anastasia Nikolaevna in 1906.

legrandcirque:

From left to right, Grand Duchesses Olga, Tatiana, Maria, and Anastasia Nikolaevna in 1906.


Share/Save/Bookmark

mdhsphotographs:

The Soldier’s Farewell (Till We Meet Again)
ca. 1865
T.B. Boothroyd, Publisher, New York
Stereoview 
Stereoview Collection (PP1)
Maryland Historical Society
PP1.24.71 

Full image and detail. 


Share/Save/Bookmark

The Yola Language of Ireland

“Yola is an extinct West Germanic language formerly spoken in Wexford, Ireland. A branch of Middle English, it evolved separately among the English (known as the Old English) who followed the Norman barons Strongbow and Robert Fitzstephen to eastern Ireland in 1169.

The dialect, which in the period before its extinction was known as “Yola”, meaning “old”, evolved separately from the mainstream of English. Perhaps as a result of the geographic isolation and predominately rural character of the communities where it was spoken, Yola seems to have changed little down the centuries from when it first arrived in Ireland, apart from assimilating many Irish words. By the early 19th century, it was distinctly different from English spoken elsewhere.” —via wikipedia

“The strange dialect of the Forth and Bargy inhabitants eventually became known as Yola (meaning ‘old’). It included numerous words and phrases assimilated from other languages - notably, from the Irish tongue (then widely spoken throughout Wexford), and from cross - channel traders (e.g. Manx and Flemish), as well as from the works of the leading poet of his day, Geoffrey Chaucer (1340 - 1400). His famous ‘Canterbury Tales’ (written in 1387) set a literary headline for others to follow, akin to the following descriptive extracts:
‘It snewed in his hous of mete and drinke’ (reference to the lavish ‘Franklin’), and ‘Have ye not seyn som-time a pale face among a preese’(the ‘felon’). Richard Stanyhurst (1541-1610), a noted Dublin historian in his day, commenting on Yola asserted:
Yola only preserved the dregs of ancient Chaucerian English … Yola speakers have so acquainted themselves with the Irish, that they have made a ‘gallimaufrere’ (or ‘mingle- mangle’), of both languages, so that the natives of Forth and Bargy speak neither good English , nor good Irish’.”

Lhause a dher Open the door.

Theene a dher Close the door

How yarthe to die? How are you today?

Yer hele! Your health!

Hele an greve apa thee! Health & Wealth to you!

Faade teit thee - zo lournagh? What ails you, you’re so sad?

Zo wough kisth an wough parthet. So we kissed and we parted.

Aar’s no gazb in him. There’s not a breath of life in him.

Aar’s a dole o’sneow apa greoune to die. There’s a lot of snow on the ground today.

Aar’s dhurth a heighe! There’s dirty weather above (in the sky)

Caules will na get to wullow to die. Horses won’t be able to tumble today.

(Source: homepage.tinet.ie)


Share/Save/Bookmark
soundlyawake:

I was Wikipedia hopping and came across this dead language, Yola.
Apparently “farthoo” means “why?”
@FartWHO

soundlyawake:

I was Wikipedia hopping and came across this dead language, Yola.

Apparently “farthoo” means “why?”

@FartWHO


Share/Save/Bookmark

collective-history:

1. Strategic alliances

For the Anglo-Saxons and Britain’s early tribal groups, marriage was all about relationships - just not in the modern sense. The Anglo-Saxons saw marriage as a strategic tool to establish diplomatic and trade ties, says Stephanie Coontz, author of Marriage, A History: How Love Conquered Marriage. “You established peaceful relationships, trading relationships, mutual obligations with others by marrying them,” Coontz says.

This all changed with the differentiation of wealth. Parents were no longer content to marry their children off to just “anyone in a neighbouring group”. They wanted to marry them to somebody as least as wealthy and powerful as themselves, Coontz says. “That’s the period when marriage shifts and becomes a centre for intrigue and betrayal.”

2. Consent

During the 11th Century, marriage was about securing an economic or political advantage. The wishes of the married couple - much less their consent - were of little importance. The bride, particularly, was assumed to bow to her father’s wishes and the marriage arrangements made on her behalf.

However, for the Benedictine monk Gratian the consent of the couple mattered more than their family’s approval. Gratian brought consent into the fold of formalised marriage in 1140 with his canon law textbook, Decretum Gratiani.

The Decretum required couples to give their verbal consent and consummate the marriage to forge a marital bond. No longer was a bride or groom’s presence at a ceremony enough to signify their assent.

The book formed the foundation for the Church’s marriage policies in the 12th Century and “set out the rules for marriage and sexuality in a changing social environment”, says historian Joanne Bailey of Oxford Brookes University.

3. The sacrament of marriage

As early as the 12th Century, Roman Catholic theologians and writers referred to marriage as a sacrament, a sacred ceremony tied to experiencing God’s presence. However, it wasn’t until the Council of Trent in 1563 that marriage was officially deemed one of the seven sacraments, says Elizabeth Davies, of the Catholic Bishops’ Conference of England and Wales.

Following the development of Protestant theology, which did not recognise marriage as a sacrament, the Council felt a need to “clarify” marriage’s place. “There was an underlying assumption that marriage was a sacrament, but it was clearly defined in 1563 because of the need to challenge teaching that suggested it wasn’t,” Davies says.

4. Wedding Vows

Marriage vows, as couples recite them today, date back to Thomas Cranmer, the architect of English Protestantism. Cranmer laid out the purpose for marriage and scripted modern wedding vows nearly 500 years ago in his Book of Common Prayer, says the Reverend Duncan Dormor of St John’s College at the University of Cambridge.

Although the book was revised in 1552 and 1662, “the guts of the marriage service are there in 1549,” he says. “All the things that you think of, ‘to have and to hold, from this day forward, for better, for worse, for richer, for poorer’, all of that stuff comes from that point.” The marriage service has had “remarkable continuity” compared with most other services, he says.

But much of it was “pilfered from Catholic medieval rites”, such as the Sarum marriage liturgy, which was all in Latin except the actual vows. “What makes the 1549 service significant is that it is the introduction of a Protestant service in English, and it’s basically the words that we all know with a couple of small tweaks,” Dormor says.

5. Divorce

Before 1858, divorce was rare. In 1670, Parliament passed an act allowing John Manners, Lord Roos, to divorce his wife, Lady Anne Pierpon. This created a precedent for parliamentary divorces on the grounds of the wife’s adultery, according to the National Archives.

This marked “the start of modern ‘divorce’,” says Rebecca Probert of the University of Warwick School of Law.

It also set the precedent for more than 300 cases between the late 17th and mid-19th Centuries - each requiring an act of Parliament. It was only in 1858 that divorce could be carried out via legal process. Even then divorce was too expensive for most people, and there was the added challenge for wives of proving “aggravated” adultery - that their husbands had been guilty of cruelty, desertion, bigamy, incest, sodomy or bestiality, Probert says.

The gates for divorce opened with the Divorce Reform Act of 1969. Instead of pointing the finger, couples could cite marital breakdown as the reason for the split.

“Prior to 1969, the script was that marriage was for life” says Bren Neale, a University of Leeds sociologist. “The divorce law meant that people trapped in bad marriages need not stay in them forever.” The emphasis on marriage shifted from a long-term commitment at all costs to a personal relationship where individual fulfilment is important, she says.

6. State control

The Clandestine Marriage Act of 1753, popularly known as Lord Hardwicke’s Act, marked the beginning of state involvement in marriage, says sociologist Carol Smart of the University of Manchester. “You’ve got these parallel strands going on of the secular and the religious sides, and that clearly hasn’t gone away,” Smart adds.

The act required couples to get married in a church or chapel by a minister, otherwise the union was void. Couples also had to issue a formal marriage announcement, called banns, or obtain a licence.

Most prospective newlyweds were already following these directives, which were enshrined in canon law. But with the act, “the penalty for not complying became much, much harsher,” Probert says.

“You can see it as the state increasing its control - this is almost too important just to leave to canon law, this needs a statute scheme and specific penalties if you don’t comply,” she says. “[It] put the formalities required for a valid marriage on a statutory footing for the first time.”

7. Civil marriages

The Marriage Act of 1836 allowed for non-religious civil marriages to be held in register offices. These were set up in towns and cities across England and Wales. The act also meant nonconformists and Catholic couples could marry in their own places of worship, according to their own rites. Apart from a brief period during the 17th Century, marriages had been overseen by the Church of England - even if the couples weren’t members.

“If you were Baptist, you might not want to get married in the Church of England but that was what you had to do,” Probert says. “There’s no point in going through a ceremony that didn’t give you the status of a married couple.”

The state also started keeping national statistics for marriage around this time. Non-Anglican couples were required to have a civil official present to document their marriages. “They’re not actually trusted, in a sense, to record marriages themselves,” Probert says.

8. Love enshrined

Roaming bards sang of love during medieval times and Shakespeare’s Romeo and Juliet acted it out on stage, but it wasn’t until the Victorian era that it became accepted as a foundation for marriage. “The Victorians were really, really invested in the idea of love - that marriage should actually be based on love or companionship,” says Jennifer Phegley, author of Courtship and Marriage in Victorian England.

The growing importance of the middle class and new money blurred the traditional social boundaries for marriage. With more social mobility, there was a growing “distaste” among the middle classes for thinking of marriage as “a family-arranged event for exchanging a daughter into a family for gain”, Phegley says.

Aspiring lovebirds needed only look to Queen Victoria and Prince Albert for inspiration - the couple was upheld as the icon of the loving marriage. Their union may have been based on bloodlines, but Victoria frequently referred to it as a “love match”. “If you read her letters and her diaries, she’s very effusive about how in love with him she was, and this sort of filtered down into society,” Phegley says.

9. More than baby-making

Catholic and Anglican doctrine have historically elevated procreation as one of the primary reasons for marriage. But in the late 19th Century, a “silent revolution” began taking place, Dormor says. With more children surviving and family sizes ballooning, couples started using rudimentary methods of birth control to limit pregnancies. “It begins the process of decoupling procreation from marriage, at some level,” Dormor says.

“Before, if you’re married, you have a sexual relationship, and you have kids. The idea that you would do something to stop yourself from having kids within a marriage doesn’t seem to be part of the mental landscape, but in the last few decades [of the 19th Century] it’s quite clear that things are changing.”

The Anglican Church cautiously accepted artificial contraception in the 1930s at a conference of bishops, but only where there was a “clearly felt moral obligation to limit or avoid parenthood”. Today, the Church of England does not regard contraception as a sin or going against God’s purpose.

For the Catholic Church “the procreation of children” remains “one of the essential things that marriage is about”, says Father Ashley Beck at St Mary’s University College, London. When a couple is preparing to marry, the subject of children is often discussed with a priest. “If they were going to rule out having children, then we wouldn’t marry them,” he says.

10. Civil partnerships

The first ceremonies under the Civil Partnerships Act took place in Northern Ireland, Scotland, England and Wales in December 2005. At the time, campaigners said the law ended inequalities for same-sex couples. Meg Munn, minister for equality, said: “It accords people in same-sex relationships the same sort of rights and responsibilities that are available to married couples.”

Smart calls the event a “milestone” that “is marriage by any other name, essentially”.

She adds: “Legally speaking, there’s only a tiny difference.

“The actual allowing of same-sex couples to enter into a state-recognised, basically marriage, with all the same obligations, the same safeguards and so on is really, really significant.”

To many Christians, however, while a civil partnership confers all the legal rights of marriage, a church wedding is seen as a mystical event, the making of promises before God in a sacred setting, endowing the relationship with a special “blessed” quality


Share/Save/Bookmark
attolences:

Jarlshof, Scotland, Bronze Age settlement

attolences:

Jarlshof, Scotland, Bronze Age settlement


Share/Save/Bookmark

bazinga-linguist:

Evidence for a forgotten ancient language which dates back more than 2,500 years, to the time of the Assyrian Empire, has been found by archaeologists working in Turkey.


Share/Save/Bookmark
miraculousnyne:

Jewish marriage ceremony in Nuremberg, Germany, c. 1726

miraculousnyne:

Jewish marriage ceremony in Nuremberg, Germany, c. 1726


Share/Save/Bookmark
is-brunelleschi:

Definition of SerfsMedieval Serfs were peasants who worked his lord’s land and paid him certain dues in return for the use of land, the possession (not the ownership) of which was heritable. The dues were usually in the form of labor on the lord’s land. Medieval Serfs were expected to work for approximately 3 days each week on the lord’s land. A serf was one bound to work on a certain estate, and thus attached to the soil, and sold with it into the service of whoever purchases the land.
Daily Life of a SerfThe daily life of a serf was hard. The Medieval serfs did not receive their land as a free gift; for the use of it they owed certain duties to their master. These took chiefly the form of personal services. Medieval Serfs had to labor on the lord’s domain for two or three days each week, and at specially busy seasons, such as ploughing and harvesting, Serfs had to do do extra work. The daily life of a serf was dictated by the requirements of the lord of the manor. At least half his time was usually demanded by the lord. Serfs also had to make certain payments, either in money or more often in grain, honey, eggs, or other produce. When Serfs ground the wheat he was obliged to use the lord’s mill, and pay the customary charge. In theory the lord could tax his serfs as heavily and make them work as hard as he pleased, but the fear of losing his tenants doubtless in most cases prevented him from imposing too great burdens on the daily life of the serf.
The Serfs Common Use of Non-arable LandBesides the serfs holding of farm land, which in England averaged about thirty acres, each peasant had certain rights over the non-arable land of the manor. He could cut a limited amount of hay from the meadow. He could turn so many farm animals such as cattle, geese and swine on the waste. Serfs also enjoyed the privilege of taking so much wood from the forest for fuel and building purposes. A serfs’s holding, which also included a house in the village, thus formed a complete outfit.
Medieval Serfs Clothing The Medieval serfs clothing was basic and practical. A Medieval Serfs clothing or dress consisted of:

A blouse of cloth or skin fastened by a leather belt round the waist


An overcoat or mantle of thick woollen material, which fell from his shoulders to half-way down his legs


Shoes or large boots


Short woollen trousers,


From his belt there hung a sheath for his knife


Medieval serfs generally went bareheaded, but in cold weather or in rain he wore a woollen hat


Gloves were only worn for their practical clothing value and were padded for use in tasks such as hedging 

Origin of the Serfs and SerfdomSerfdom developed during the later centuries of the Roman Empire and in the early Middle Ages. Most serfs seem to have been the successors, of Roman slaves, whose condition had gradually improved. Serfs were also recruited from the ranks of freemen who, because of the desire to gain the protection of a lord, became subject to him.
The Oppression of SerfsSerfdom represented a stage between slavery and freedom and therefore the oppression of serfs. A slave belonged to his master; he was bought and sold like other chattels. Medieval Serfs had a higher position, for they could not be sold apart from the land nor could his holding be taken from him. Medieval Serfs were fixed to the soil. On the other hand serfs ranked lower than a freeman, because he could not change his abode, nor marry outside the manor, nor bequeath his goods, without the permission of his lord.
The Emancipation of SerfsSerfdom was destined to be a transitory condition. The emancipation of the Medieval serfs occurred over many years. The most important events which led to the emancipation of the Medieval serf in the England of the Middle Ages was the Black Death which was followed by the Peasants revolt. The Black Death claimed nearly a third of the English population. With fewer people the value of laborers increased which led to the Peasants Revolt. By the close of medieval times of the Middle Ages, the serfs in most parts of western Europe had secured their freedom form the shackles of serfdom.

Article via http://www.middle-ages.org.uk/serfs.htm

is-brunelleschi:

Definition of Serfs
Medieval Serfs were peasants who worked his lord’s land and paid him certain dues in return for the use of land, the possession (not the ownership) of which was heritable. The dues were usually in the form of labor on the lord’s land. Medieval Serfs were expected to work for approximately 3 days each week on the lord’s land. A serf was one bound to work on a certain estate, and thus attached to the soil, and sold with it into the service of whoever purchases the land.

Daily Life of a Serf
The daily life of a serf was hard. The Medieval serfs did not receive their land as a free gift; for the use of it they owed certain duties to their master. These took chiefly the form of personal services. Medieval Serfs had to labor on the lord’s domain for two or three days each week, and at specially busy seasons, such as ploughing and harvesting, Serfs had to do do extra work. The daily life of a serf was dictated by the requirements of the lord of the manor. At least half his time was usually demanded by the lord. Serfs also had to make certain payments, either in money or more often in grain, honey, eggs, or other produce. When Serfs ground the wheat he was obliged to use the lord’s mill, and pay the customary charge. In theory the lord could tax his serfs as heavily and make them work as hard as he pleased, but the fear of losing his tenants doubtless in most cases prevented him from imposing too great burdens on the daily life of the serf.

The Serfs Common Use of Non-arable Land
Besides the serfs holding of farm land, which in England averaged about thirty acres, each peasant had certain rights over the non-arable land of the manor. He could cut a limited amount of hay from the meadow. He could turn so many farm animals such as cattle, geese and swine on the waste. Serfs also enjoyed the privilege of taking so much wood from the forest for fuel and building purposes. A serfs’s holding, which also included a house in the village, thus formed a complete outfit.

Medieval Serfs Clothing The Medieval serfs clothing was basic and practical. A Medieval Serfs clothing or dress consisted of:

  • A blouse of cloth or skin fastened by a leather belt round the waist

  • An overcoat or mantle of thick woollen material, which fell from his shoulders to half-way down his legs

  • Shoes or large boots

  • Short woollen trousers,

  • From his belt there hung a sheath for his knife

  • Medieval serfs generally went bareheaded, but in cold weather or in rain he wore a woollen hat

  • Gloves were only worn for their practical clothing value and were padded for use in tasks such as hedging 

Origin of the Serfs and Serfdom
Serfdom developed during the later centuries of the Roman Empire and in the early Middle Ages. Most serfs seem to have been the successors, of Roman slaves, whose condition had gradually improved. Serfs were also recruited from the ranks of freemen who, because of the desire to gain the protection of a lord, became subject to him.

The Oppression of Serfs
Serfdom represented a stage between slavery and freedom and therefore the oppression of serfs. A slave belonged to his master; he was bought and sold like other chattels. Medieval Serfs had a higher position, for they could not be sold apart from the land nor could his holding be taken from him. Medieval Serfs were fixed to the soil. On the other hand serfs ranked lower than a freeman, because he could not change his abode, nor marry outside the manor, nor bequeath his goods, without the permission of his lord.

The Emancipation of Serfs
Serfdom was destined to be a transitory condition. The emancipation of the Medieval serfs occurred over many years. The most important events which led to the emancipation of the Medieval serf in the England of the Middle Ages was the Black Death which was followed by the Peasants revolt. The Black Death claimed nearly a third of the English population. With fewer people the value of laborers increased which led to the Peasants Revolt. By the close of medieval times of the Middle Ages, the serfs in most parts of western Europe had secured their freedom form the shackles of serfdom.

Article via http://www.middle-ages.org.uk/serfs.htm


Share/Save/Bookmark

keridiana:

Going Medieval: Animals of The Cloisters (the Metropolitan Museum of Art in Fort Tryon Park, NYC).


Share/Save/Bookmark
maketimestandstill:

Went to Walkworth Castle today. #castle #old #medieval #badass  (Taken with instagram)

maketimestandstill:

Went to Walkworth Castle today. #castle #old #medieval #badass (Taken with instagram)


Share/Save/Bookmark
Theme by paulstraw.