Talk:The Anarchy

message: I have been doing some research online to determine the historical accuracy of the novel Pillars of the Earth by Ken Follet. I have read this novel four times in the last few years. It is set against the period known as the Anarchy and incorporates the various battles and persons of the time including Thomas Becket a religious saint and martyr.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.97.126.69 (talk) 01:19, 20 October 2003 (UTC)
replies: text: Why not? It doesn't do any harm, and some may find it interesting. 84.70.129.167 14:24, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

text: Done. Wilfridselsey (talk) 08:57, 6 December 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: old comments

message: I have changed "mercenary captain, William of Ypres." to "Flemish captain, William of Ypres, Earl of Kent". because  during the middle ages claiming someone was a mercenary does not mean the same as in the modern era. Who says he was a mercenary? What made him a mercenary? For example was he paid more than others who did a similar job? Did he pay homage to King Stephen of England? As he was Earl of Kent he must have done so. If he did then he was not a mercenary. --Philip Baird Shearer 09:02, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: While William of Ypres was certainly Flemish, he was also a mercenary captain, because he was paid for fighting with his men on Stephen's side. That view is supported both by contemporaries (e.g. Gesta Stephani, Historia Novella) and historians (e.g. D.Crouch, G.J.White). You're quite right about the Earldom of Kent - he certainly did homage to Stephen for it, but only received it in the first place as a form of payment for his services (the Southeast was just about the only area of England over which Stephen had uninterrupted jurisdiction throughout the crisis). Even that, though, did not earn him recognition as 'English' or 'non-mercenary' in any practical sense by either Stephen's or Matilda's supporters (e.g. William of Malmesbury, Henry of Huntingdon).Khnumhotep (talk) 08:36, 13 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  William of Ypres 

message: Most of this article is written in a folksy, story-telling manner with lots of unnecessary phrases, cliches, flowery language and full of subjective comments.  Things like "with great speed he entered London" ; "but it went against the grain" ; "Ranulf got wind of this" ; "muster a force of knights" and "Thus the stage was set for battle."  I could go on, there is plenty more.  It is fine for a children's bedtime story, but not an encyclopedia article.  It is not professional and needs to be tightened up.  The article could easily be half the length with the same content.  It should just stick to the facts.  People can read "exciting" narratives about The Anarchy elsewhere.70.56.162.141 18:41, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Most of Article is written in unprofessional manner 

message: In paragraph 2 of the section, Conflict Between Stephen and Matilda, the article states that after Stephen was captured and imprisoned, "Matilda temporarily ruled from London" - yet in the final sentence of the section, After Matilda's escape, it states that "Matilda never ruled in her own right". I assume this means that she was de facto ruler for a short period but was never actually crowned monarch. However if this is so then the contradiction needs to be explained. Carnivalist 01:38, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  There appears to be a factual contradiction in this article 

message: Phrases referring to the "election" of Theobald and the "ratification" of his kingship are suggestive of a very different political structure to that which existed in 12th Century England. Medieval England did not have a specific law structure with which to choose a monarch that this suggests.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by ChuckStone (talk • contribs) 02:38, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: As has been explained elsewhere on this page, it's not clear that "the years when Christ and his Saints slept" is a name rather than a description. As for the "ninteen-year winter", it was removed because it was unsourced so presumably if a reliable source using the term is presented it an be re-added. Nev1 (talk) 12:16, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

text: It was unsourced because there was no source in the article. If the term "nineteen-years winter" has been used for 300 years then could you please provide some proof. Which textbooks is it used in? As has been repeatedly stated, the fact the ASC describes the war as the "years when Christ and his Saints slept" isn't in dispute, whether it is a name is. Nev1 (talk) 20:48, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

text: A search of Google books for "19 year winter" produces two results, neither of which are related to the Anarchy. A search for "ninteen year winter" produces 20 results, of which only two relate to the Anarchy. The first "primarily consists of articles available from Wikipedia or other free sources online" while I'm suspicious the second may also have been influenced by Wikipedia. If you edit war over this, you will be blocked. Nev1 (talk) 20:57, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

text: Which books? You have been repeatedly asked to provide sources but have continued to fail to do so. Nev1 (talk) 21:24, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

text: I did indeed check, hence the Google book links I provided (ie: none of King, Bartlett, or Matthew use the term). A search of Jstor also shows no results for the term "nineteen year winter". Nev1 (talk) 14:30, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

text: You're right, King does say "nineteen long winters", but he calls it a description rather than a name. The issue of description vs name is the same goes for the ASC quote as you have been told ad nauseam. Nev1 (talk) 22:22, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

text: Not in the manner you wanted because you were asserting that descriptions are the same as names. And the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle quote is used: in the fourth paragraph of the lead and the first paragraph of the historiography section. Nev1 (talk) 13:47, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

text: What was the quote again? Nev1 (talk) 21:11, 3 March 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Anachronistic Concepts

message: Hi; when was this period first called The Anarchy? The earliest known use of the word anarchy I'm aware of is from the 18th century, so is this a name given to the period after the event, or was the word anarchy in use in the 12th cenutry? Cheers, Chris 86.131.100.36 (talk) 23:44, 27 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I can not answer when this period was first called The Anarchy, but according to the OED the first use of the word anarchy meaning "Absence of government; a state of lawlessness due to the absence or inefficiency of the supreme power; political disorder."  was "1539 TAVERNER Erasm. Prov. (1552) 43 This unleful lyberty or lycence of the multytude is called an Anarchie." All other meanings are more recent. Anarchy is derived from the Greek and "the word was also adopted in med.L. anarchia, and Fr. anarchie (Cotgr. 1611), from one or other of which the Eng. may have been immediately taken." --Philip Baird Shearer (talk) 13:04, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Etymology? 

message: The first paragraph of this section mentions Robert of Gloucester opposing Stephen's usurpation of the throne (implying he is on Matilda's side). However the first line of the next paragraph says that the following year he switched sides to Matilda. Can someone clarify this point? Mikenlesley (talk) 04:28, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Conflict between Stephen and Matilda 

message: When considering who had the right to rule, Stephen was the crowned and consecrated King. As the fighting was between a king and supposed subjects this seems more like a civil war than an anarchy.
The so called Anarchy doesn't seem to have come any further south than London and then only briefly. Is there any record about conditions in the southern counties, Kent, Devon, Cornwall etc.AT Kunene (talk) 09:53, 18 May 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Points to ponder 

message: Hchc2009, what a splendid effort! Assessed as B-class. Before you submit this for A-class, please do the following. I noticed you strung together several identical footnotes, as follows. "Sentence." (page 105) "Sentence." (page 105) Instead these should be collapsed, like this. "Sentence. Sentence." (page 105) I fixed a few typos. Great job. Djmaschek (talk) 03:49, 31 January 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks! Should be sorted now. Torigni/y gets spelt differently by different authors, so I've gone for the wikipedia preferred article title! Will give the article a bit longer to settle down, and then take it through good article and A-class reviews... Hchc2009 (talk) 08:18, 31 January 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Assess as B-class

message: The caption reads that this depicts Scottish attacks of 1138.  Do you have a solid reference for this?  If it does illustrate a Scottish attack, it seems more likely to depict those of its own time in the first third of the 14th century. If you don't have a ref I recommend you go vague and drop the date or replace with a different image.Monstrelet (talk) 11:00, 5 February 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: The original uploader referenced  Michael Camille, Mirror in Parchment: The Luttrell Psalter and the Making of Medieval England, (London, 1999), p. 285); I don't have a copy of this so can't easily check it. Hchc2009 (talk) 12:09, 5 February 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: But, double checking, the dating actually came from one of the sub-article, so is unsafe. I'll remove. Hchc2009 (talk) 12:10, 5 February 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Image from Luttrell Psalter 

message: I still believe that this article needs more about the plight of civilian population. There are of cause things from TASC that could be quoted IF someone could help me find sources for it. http://www.eyewitnesstohistory.com/medievalengland.htm http://www.webhistoryofengland.com/?p=1319
Does anyone know why I can't put up links from "hubpages" here?Cynicalquest (talk) 14:13, 9 January 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Still think this article needs a section about the situation of the civilian population. 

message: To someone not knowledgeable in English history, the intro and sidebar are extremely confusing: It's not clear sometimes whom 'Henry' refers to, and FitzEmpress and Plantagenet are variously used without explanation.— Preceding unsigned comment added by XcentricXplorer (talk • contribs) 14:11, 18 March 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Consistent Naming?