http://www.bajrfed.co.uk/bajrpress/animated-bayeux-tapestry/
For interest!
Thanks, Roy - an interesting way of bringing the tapestry to life.
The animators could have benefitted from a lesson in equine anatomy, though.
Quote from: Patrick Waterson on March 23, 2015, 09:39:50 PM
The animators could have benefitted from a lesson in equine anatomy, though.
This is probably true of the original needlewomen as well, though.
I like the bit where a house is burned to make way for the Norman army. Another example of the PC nonsense that kids are taught. Normans ravage the countryside to terrorise the inhabitants and bring Harold to battle, might be more accurate. But overall its a good thing, neat work on the battle scenes.
Roy
One other point, seeing it rolling along made me think about the armourer's wagon. Presumably the large barrel containst mailshirts in oil. though ith would be a beast to manoeuvre! Does that and the rows of helmets, racks of spears and swords, imply that armour was issued? After all, if you, a miles, own your own mail shirt then it might not be easy to identify it in a barrel of others, all greased up? If helmets are fitted then how does that fit with mass transport? Maybe these are replacement weapons, but maybe they indicate a centralised issue of arms for the common soldiers in a contingent.
Roy
Quote from: aligern on March 24, 2015, 10:11:12 AM
I like the bit where a house is burned to make way for the Norman army. Another example of the PC nonsense that kids are taught. Normans ravage the countryside to terrorise the inhabitants and bring Harold to battle, might be more accurate. But overall its a good thing, neat work on the battle scenes.
Roy
The written sources are very clear that the Normans deliberately ravaged the land as it was Harold's personal holding. They were specifically trying to bring him to battle. (not least because the English fleet was back at sea and across their supply line).
Perhaps the latest thinking is that the Norman army was too unmanoeuvrable to march round houses ...
Seriously, Roy and Tom are right: that bit is bad history.