Go Back   David Icke's Official Forums > Main Forums > Ancient & Forbidden Knowledge / False History

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 16-08-2018, 07:22 PM   #41
da2255
Senior Member
 
da2255's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2018
Location: Intergalactic Space
Posts: 259
Likes: 148 (96 Posts)
Default

I don't usually like anything in here but I though this was quite good:

https://www.theguardian.com/commenti...uality-normans

Nearly four years ago, I began writing a novel, set in the aftermath of the Norman conquest of 1066. Before I began to write, I spent six months sitting in the Bodleian library poring over books and journals to familiarise myself with the period. I soon realised that, apart from the story of the Battle of Hastings that everyone learns at school, I knew hardly anything about the impact of the conquest. I began to understand, too, how much of that impact is still with us.

By the end of the process, I had come to a slightly disquieting conclusion: we are still being governed by Normans.

Take house prices. According to the author Kevin Cahill, the main driver behind the absurd expense of owning land and property in Britain is that so much of the nation's land is locked up by a tiny elite. Just 0.3% of the population – 160,000 families – own two thirds of the country. Less than 1% of the population owns 70% of the land, running Britain a close second to Brazil for the title of the country with the most unequal land distribution on Earth.

Much of this can be traced back to 1066. The first act of William the Conqueror, in 1067, was to declare that every acre of land in England now belonged to the monarch. This was unprecedented: Anglo-Saxon England had been a mosaic of landowners. Now there was just one. William then proceeded to parcel much of that land out to those who had fought with him at Hastings. This was the beginning of feudalism; it was also the beginning of the landowning culture that has plagued England – and Britain – ever since.

The dukes and earls who still own so much of the nation's land, and who feature every year on the breathless rich lists, are the beneficiaries of this astonishing land grab. William's 22nd great-granddaughter, who today sits on the throne, is still the legal owner of the whole of England. Even your house, if you've been able to afford one, is technically hers. You're a tenant, and the price of your tenancy is your loyalty to the crown. When the current monarch dies, her son will inherit the crown (another Norman innovation, incidentally, since Anglo-Saxon kings were elected). As Duke of Cornwall, he is the inheritor of land that William gave to Brian of Brittany in 1068, for helping to defeat the English at Hastings.

The land grab was not the only injustice perpetrated by the Normans that has echoed down the centuries. William built a network of castles with English slave labour from which he controlled the rebellious populace by force. This method of colonisation and control was later exported to Ireland, Scotland and Wales, as the descendants of the Norman kings extended their empire from England to the Celtic nations. They taxed the poor harshly (the Domesday book is a tax collector's manual), deepening rural poverty to enrich royal coffers which were used to fight the continental wars that ravaged medieval Europe. Not without justification has one historian referred to Norman rule as a system of "medieval apartheid".

These days, I can't stop myself wondering what kind of country this might be now if William had lost at Hastings. Would we have been spared the aristocratic estates and the hereditary monarchs? Could the industrial revolution, even the empire, have happened in the same way without that intense concentration of land and power? Would the English be a less deferential people than they often still, frustratingly, are?

Questions like this can never be answered. But I think it's worth noting that in 2012, as in 1066, the ruling class still drink wine while the "plebs" drink beer, much of the country remains the property of a few elite families and the descendants of the Normans remain wealthier than the general population. Meanwhile, the nation as a whole is paying the price for the rapacity of a wealthy elite which feels no obligation to its people.

But it's worth noting something else too. The Norman conquest spurred a decade-long campaign of underground resistance by guerrilla bands across England – a story that is largely forgotten now. The Normans called these rebels the "silvatici" – the men of the woods, or the wild men – and they proved as hard to defeat as guerrilla fighters always are. Though the Normans were never expelled, the spirit of the silvatici can be traced throughout later English history, from the Peasants' Revolt to the tales of Robin Hood. Not everyone takes conquest lying down. Today's elites might like to take note.

Last edited by da2255; 17-08-2018 at 12:51 PM.
da2255 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17-08-2018, 08:50 AM   #42
semper_occultus
Senior Member
 
semper_occultus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: ..there is another system..
Posts: 353
Likes: 112 (73 Posts)
Default

stark example would be the Grosvenor estate

One of Britain's richest men inherits billions and avoids paying inheritance taxes

I recall Tolkien believed there was a lost "English" culture that got steam-rollered by the norman invasion & he was trying to recreate it with the whole Middle Earth mythos / Lord of the Rings saga
Likes: (2)
semper_occultus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18-08-2018, 11:15 AM   #43
iamawaveofthesea
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: under the raven banner
Posts: 25,312
Likes: 13,114 (7,523 Posts)
Default

Any colonial process of occupation, rape, pillage or genocide that was carried out against black or brown people by the FREEMASONIC elite who control britain was carried out against the white people of europe first by those bloodlines

We have been occupied, raped, pillaged and genocided for far longer than any of the people discussed in modern theory about colonialism
__________________
I believe the public should have a say in their own fate and that is why i support free speech. Any media talking heads who argue that free speech must be curbed are arguing that the public should not be allowed a say in their own fate
Likes: (4)
iamawaveofthesea is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18-08-2018, 01:40 PM   #44
decim
Senior Member
 
decim's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 15,742
Likes: 2,694 (1,515 Posts)
Default

Good to see you back IAAWOTS.
__________________
DISCLAIMER: Reader discretion advised. The above post is entirely fictional, for entertainment purposes only. Any similarities to real life events, animals, humans, persons, politicians, or any other form of organisation entity living, dead or in any other state of existence are coincidental. Any opinion, comment or statements related or attributed to this username are not necessarily nor implied to be those held by the ip/computer/username or other electronic media device or service owner/user.
Likes: (1)
decim is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 09:39 AM.


Shoutbox provided by vBShout (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2018 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.