Open thread this week - let’s scattergun our historical topics. Non-historical also fine. I’ll drop in on the thread over the next couple of days to answer questions, then round up the best on the audio post this Friday.
That does feel like a conversation that happens all-too regularly in the United States, although mostly without the two sides in the conversation listening to one another.
The all too frequent mass shootings negate whatever argument or justification the pro gun lobby put forward. That definitely is my final word on it. Definitely.
When I can't go to work, the grocery store, the theatre, etc. without fear of being murdered there is only one side, in a free, modern society that is.
and when are we going to address the mental health components? the policies that put criminals right back on the street? beefing up security in our schools? Stopping the insane "defund the police" movement? But it certainly doesn't help when people completely shut down the idea of talking to the other side.
Genuine question. Wouldn't a ban on the sale of automatic weapons be a step in the right direction? What need is there to own an automatic weapon? I understand the need for hand guns for personal defence and hunting rifles for hunting. Shotguns, you could make an argument for but why would anyone need an armour piercing machine gun? It makes no sense to me.
Automatic weapons are already banned. An AR is not an automatic weapon. It shoots the exact same rounds as a bolt action rifle - and takes magazines as well. The only thing is that it LOOKS scary. Armour piercing rounds are already banned. The problem is that too many people don't understand what guns do what, and which are already illegal.
OK. Let's call them what the law calls them. Assault weapons. My understanding is that 7 states have a ban on assault weapons. 43 states have no ban. Also there was a federal ban on assault weapons but it expired in the early 2000s I believe. A new law was proposed in 2013 but was defeated in the Senate. 60 to 40 I believe. Maybe it's time to try again? Or would it just be defeated again? A ban on assault weapons would be a step in the right direction. It wouldn't stop the mass shootings but it would limit the number of casualties. And given the divide, that seems to be the best people can hope for.
Not at the risk of undoing all of the security they had. They literally had just fought a war, where there was no standing army - it was average men that refused to bow to a tyrannical government. I think the difference is in the way kids are raised today - when I went to high school we had guys in the school parking lot who had rifles in their trucks and we didn't have a single instance of school violence. Kids also used to be part of a family unit, taught respect and responsibility at an early age, and not to be coddled.
So true! I think it was Jefferson who said “ Hey! You know, we left this England place ’cause it was bogus; so if we don’t get some cool rules ourselves—pronto—we’ll just be bogus, too!” Wish they’d banned muskets in classrooms.
This question makes a large, sweeping (and incorrect) generalization about all US citizens and assumes it hasn't had this conversation. ...Maybe, don't do that.
My final word on it. America has an illness that is eating away at all that is great about US society. Maybe it's time for real action rather than conversation? It's an American problem and America has to fix it. Americans deserve better.
*My issue is your original statement generalized all of us. Some US citizens fight this fight everyday. Every single day. It is our life's work. And it was our friend, a teacher, gunned down at MSD and another was the ER doc that is still dealing with what he saw. The 26 Acts of Kindness Movement was started by my husband and son and used by NBC. I'm asking you not to make generalized statements about all. At least half the citizens are trying.
American here. IMO, Americans don't need a conversation since polls indicate we agree on what we want and need. We need Congress (specifically half of the Senate) to listen and act on our will
how about the desires of the citizens who want the borders secured? Who want criminals actually held accountable ? You'll find that when you get off the coasts and move further inland there are a lot more conservative people then you think. You'll find that there are a lot of people who are for RESPONSIBLE gun ownership - and that the NRA specifically focuses on gun safety and responsibility. Maybe it would help to actually learn what the NRA does....
Actually, I've been thinking about this all day. It's such an awful thing. BUT, I popped on here with a history question regarding it: What were the medieval attitudes towards weapons? Was it generally understood that everyone walked around armed to go into battle? Did the ladies all have hidden daggers in their underclothes? (Kidding...maybe...)
I believe I came across the fact that even in our "Old West" there were laws and rules regarding leaving weapons at home before entering public places. It's wasn't as "Wild West-y" in that regard as we imagine sometimes.
This IS a good question, and in some senses the Second Amendment is a classic statement of attitudes to peacekeeping that derived from medieval England. Before a standing police force, the responsibility for security/peacekeeping (domestically and of the coasts/borders) fell upon communities. So it was the duty and responsibility of communities to arm themselves for that purpose. There's a direct line from legislation of the C13th in England to 'A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State...' Of course, in every C21st democracy we now have handed over the responsibility of peacekeeping and security to the state in the form of policing and a standing army. So not only is there no need for communities and individuals to arm themselves for the purpose of keeping the peace and defending the realm, it is often disadvantageous to the functioning of a 'free' society to allow them to do so.
The problem (I think) is that the Second Amendment is a product of a time in which the transition from community defence to state-organised security was very much in flux, and when there was a widespread fear that to give the state a monopoly on bearing arms for the purpose of peacekeeping was to invite tyranny. (If you line up today on the side of 'defund the police' you are probably of this mindset...) In other words, the Second Amendment takes a very particular line in favour of medieval policing/security systems and against what we would now (in most countries) consider a normal feature of the nation state. That is a problem from time to time, and a bug in a US Constitution which in many/most other ways is a wonderfully farsighted document which underpins the functioning of the most important democracy in the world.
I think what is the bigger problem here is that this country is going down a dangerous path, with a lot of crime, an open border and the economy in tatters. You are never going to make the argument that people can't defend themselves - and it only seeks to further divide the country when people refuse to listen to the other side. There is a whole host of problems that should be addressed and laws on the books enforced.
Wasn't the 2nd Amendment put in place after the Revolutionary War, when the standing army was eliminated in America? Hence, the need for a militia, with their arms ready to defend the state. Once the standing army was put in place, I think after the War of 1812, the need for a militia should have been no longer needed. Of course, much of population was armed, for shooting squirrels and such.
The second amendment isn't there just in regards to militia. It is also so that if there is a tyrannical government that the people can rise up if needed. It is also worth noting that it isn't just guns that you might think of under the second amendment. The 2016 Supreme Court ruling of Castano v Massachusetts ruled that tasers/stun guns were also protected. The 2nd amendment was never about hunting - it was always as a way to protect people's rights. If a country came and invaded our country, the second amendment allows the common people to come together to repel that invasion, even if they are not members of the military. For a long time, the Supreme Court held the opinion that the Second Amendment applied only to the federal government. They said that it did not prevent state governments from regulating gun ownership or use. Two court cases changed this opinion. In District of Columbia v. Heller in 2008, the Supreme Court invalidated a federal law that made it illegal for nearly all citizens in Washington, D.C. to own guns. Then, in McDonald v. Chicago in 2010, the Supreme Court outlawed a similar citywide ban on hand guns. Laws have passed that raises the minimum age to buy a weapon, allows cops to take guns from mentally disturbed people, imposes a waiting period when purchasing a gun, and bans bump stocks (devices that can be attached to a gun to make it fire more rapidly). In addition it is against the law for a felon to have weapons. The biggest problems come from the statistics. Something like 67% of all mass shootings are not done with a rifle/AR-15 they are actually committed with handguns. Also if you look at the last decade of "mass shootings" - once you take out armed robberies, domestic disputes and gang violence the number of shootings drops to just over a handful. The majority of the mass shootings listed in the database of the Violence Project show that California which has some of the strictest laws has the most mass shootings. Vermont, which has the least gun laws has had one "mass shooting" where an individual who ad lost their kids to CPS shot the social worker and then the three family members that had reported her in the first place. If a man shoots his wife and kids, and then kills himself, that is technically a mass shooting. A gangbanger in Chicago does a drive by of a house, and more then three victims - that is a mass shooting. The worst issue I have seen though is in Washington State there are now cities where they will no longer assign officers to rape cases. So it is on the women to find a way to protect themselves, because no one is going to be looking out for them. It is really a multi-faceted issue, and no one thing is going to fix it. But people don't even want to consider more then one thing at a time - they are like horses with blinders on.
Appreciate your intelligent and well-stated response. I have been a gun owner all of my life, mainly as guns used to be for hunting. We didn't need machine guns to hunt a deer or a duck. Now, when hunting is at a all time low, gun ownership is at an all time high. It is all about shooting people, and we are doing that at a rate that is completely unacceptable. I live in Redding CA, and in the last couple of weeks we have had multiple shootings, yes, mainly family members shooting each other, and one armed homeless man shooting a Taco Bell employee (high school kid) in a botched robbery. Oh, also had a high school girl bring her gun to school. No shooting, but the police had to disarm her. I used to ride ambulance, am a Navy vet, and retired RN, and while I was on the front line in responding to emergencies, and I have never seen anything like what is happening now.? NRA and gun manufacturers say buy more guns ($$$), and arm everyone. I can't see a solution short of what New Zealand and Australia have done. But we need to come together and do something. You seem smarter than I am. Any idea of solutions? Thanks.
This is a regular topic of conversation between me and my coworkers. I am apparently the odd one out, being a Nebraskan who HATES guns, but we all agree on a few things.
1. Handguns for protection, perfectly reasonable.
2. Rifles for hunting (including shotguns), perfectly reasonable.
3. Requiring a background check before being able to purchase a weapon, perfectly reasonable.
4. Limiting the number of bullets in a magazine-some debate on that due to the cost of the magazines.
5. Access to military grade weaponry (as in AR-anything)-absolutely no civilian should be able to purchase these.
6. Mandatory training-absolutely agree.
7. Mental health evaluations-absolutely agree.
The majority of responsible gun owners have no issue with laws and regulations. So, why does it seem like Americans are so irresponsible with gun ownership? To be honest, it's what the media puts out. Is it a problem that so many people have access to guns who really shouldn't? Yes. Is it going to stop someone who has deep rooted hatred? No. We've seen that with the people who have driven their vehicles into parades not caring who they hurt in the process.
I'm with you on most everything except number 5. An AR-15 is not a military grade weapon. It functions exactly the same as, and fires the same size rounds as a hunting rifle. Literally the only thing that makes people think they are military grade is the way that they look. It is always interesting to me that people have no issues with a double barrel shotgun (which does an insane amount of damage) but are against an AR-15. I've worked with both a body farm and as a first responder and I will say that the wound from an AR is much easier and less destructive then a shotgun blast. The real truth is that Democrats want ALL guns, not just the scary black ones.
Yeah, that's a lie. We don't want ALL guns. That's a nice little fallacy the GOP has been pumping out years.
I hate guns in general for personal reasons, which simply means that I will never own one.
.
As far as the difference between rifles and shotguns, yes the pellets from shotguns shells can cause a lot of damage at short range, but a shotgun can only fire one or two shells before for having to be reloaded, whereas an AR can fire up to 100 times before needing to be reloaded. You could have the fastest shotgun reload time on the planet and not get anywhere close to the amount of damage an AR can do in the same time.
Considering that extended magazines have been banned in many places now I am going to have to agree to disagree. Many hunting rifles are capable of accepting magazines as well, which means not needing to reload as often. So please explain what makes a hunting rifle acceptable and an AR-15 NOT, when they function exactly the same and the only difference is the way it looks....
at the risk of winding everyone up, name one law that would ultimately make a difference other then banning "scary guns"? Until we can agree on the fact that there is a serious mental health crisis in this country, combined with the increasingly liberal policies that reward criminals. As much hatred as there is towards the NRA I encourage people to actually learn what they do - gun responsibility and safety are high on the list of concerns. But at the end of the day - until this country stops the division, and insisting that opposing political parties need to be gotten rid of this isn't going to change. As Dan says, it is hard to get both sides to the table AND be willing to cross the aisle.
It's very strange that "mental health issues" only murder American children at school, and Americans at the grocery store, movie theatre, church.... we are the ONLY country where "mental health issues" slaughter hundreds of our own citizens every year.
What makes our "mental health issues" so much more deadly than literally every other country on earth?
The answer to your question is readily available access to guns. I'm not naive enough to say that it wouldn't be exactly the same in other countries if guns were as easily accessible. But they are not. That's the difference.
If you take away guns, bad guys are still going to get their hands on them. The only thing you are doing is keeping people from being able to defend themselves. Other countries who got rid of guns didn't get rid of all violence - they simply used different weapons. Chicago is a gun free city - has been since 1982 - and look at the amount of gun violence there. Making them illegal certainly didn't stop the violence, did it?
Chicago has 10s of thousands of weapons that cross over from Indiana (just a few short miles away, for those on the thread in Europe) every year. Until this problem is addressed federally there will be significant gun trafficking within the US. It’s well documented and a real problem.
Is Illinois a gun free state? If not, then Chicago being a gun free city in reality means little. Honest question, you don't have to answer, do you think an assault weapon ban would make mass shootings less likely? I think it would because they wouldn't be available to spur of the moment mass shooters. Yes you will still have shootings but not as many innocents will lose their life. Or is the mass shootings the price people are willing to pay for the right to bear arms? To me, that's a very high price indeed.
Illinois require you to have a firearms id that you have to go to the police to get. So getting rid of guns still doesnt have an impact. Add in that most gun crimes in IL happen with hand guns and an “assault” weapons ban wouldn’t have helped.
The lack of places to put mentally ill people who are a danger to themselves or others for one. The lack of a functional system for those who have documented mental health issues so that they DON'T get to purchase guns in the first place... the lack of personal responsibility and respect from young people.... I'm not suggesting that mental health is the only reason, but it is a piece of the puzzle that needs to be taken seriously. When I was in high school a lot of the guys (and some of us girls) had window racks with our hunting rifles in our trucks, on school grounds no less, and there was never a hint of violence. Look at what has changed in the last 20+ years other then just the guns. Look at the whole picture - it is a shift in values....
When are you going to visit the US again? I know it is a gun infested hellhole, but my friends and I would love to see you (we have driven to Louisville and Baltimore to see you speak before and it was wonderful!
How about a game of "Behead, befriend, become" for the Plantagenet monarchs, what you thinking? Self explanatory but which monarch would you wanna get rid of, which would you want to hang with on a daily basis, and which would you like to have been?
I have never heard of this game but it reminds of "marry, F, kill" now THAT would also be an interesting one for @dan - which medieval queen would he choose for that?
Stephen vs Matilda, the Wars of the Roses, Charles I vs the Parliamentarians... Which English Civil War had the greatest impact on the country as a whole?
Civil War without question... remember they CUT THE FUCKING HEAD OFF THE KING AND ABOLISHED THE MONARCHY... the pivot from a 'medieval' monarchy to a modern constitutional monarchy by no means happened instantly in the 1640s, but by the end of the C17th it was well underway. The solution to Anarchy and WOTR was by and large 'competent non-dickhead person restores system with minor reform'. The Civil War was much bigger deal in short and long term.
One thing that pops to mind - a lot of history majors I went to school with went into politics........so, that covers a ton of the choices you mention above.
Eva- I was going to leave the gun debate alone, but it you seem to be itching for someone to ‘reach out to the other side’.
I am married to someone else who was a history/biology major. He went on to be a surgeon, switched specialties, and now is a psychiatrist running a large out-patient facility in our town. Yep, that’s right mental health. It’s a problem for sure.
But I don’t wake up from vivid, nasty nightmares after one of these mass shooting because of his patients alone. There are guards on every floor trained to tackle and subdue out of control patients.
I dream that they are bringing GUNS with them to their appointments. And, it won’t be the doctor they reach first..it will be the waiting room with families and the single mom at reception who doesn’t make the salary or have the benefits my family gets out of the deal.
You are talking about the ‘other side’. I grew up in gun country too- Texas and CO.
23 yrs ago I watched my friends at Columbine (I went to the neighboring school) get marched out after that shit show, but what I remember from that day was different. I sat for a couple hours with my friend who had attended Columbine and ran track with Dylan Klebold’s big brother. She recalled how the shooter’s parents were good enough people to host the team picnics and were involved, loving parents.
We wanted to find ‘bad guys’ even that day…. but, who to blame?
It’s the GUNS, Eva.
Call them what you want (assault weapons, ARs, whatev) they all do the same thing in the end.
I will bring this somewhat back to history-
A few years ago the hospital built a brand new facility for psychiatry, and staff and families were invited on a tour prior to opening . We had recently gotten back from a trip to France where I had hired a guide to take us around Carcassonne and give us the ins and outs of the castle defenses. It was an incredibly interesting tour, but the kids were bored silly.
My older daughter went along on the psych ward tour, and afterwards looked at us and said “it’s like that guy from the castle designed this place’.
Yep honey. We are now living in a modern day fortress to keep us safe.
Thank you. Eva's been itching for a fight here and gave away her game earlier by using the code words "open borders." We don't have open borders in the US ffs, but the Fox News crowd throws that around so that we continue to live in fear of a boogie man that doesn't exist and the gun makers and NRA continue to buy off our politicians and weak-minded folks who need to feel unique and a member of a special group parrot their nonsense talking points. It's disingenuous at best, willfully ignorant or evil at its worst.
Eva is a troll who you gave a way too thoughtful response to, but I appreciate your patience.
I try to stick to a good routine that involves early mornings, daily exercise, doing most of the day's work before 3pm and a good hour 9pm-10pm, not drinking too much before Thursday. It varies with the seasons and with the impending-ness of deadlines.
If America had been falling for as long as people have been saying it is falling, I suspect it might have fallen by now. We may indeed be living at the end of history, but neither you nor anyone else have any way of knowing whether that is so.
OMG! I'm disagreeing with the venerable Jones! 😱 Please don't hold that over me!
Not necessarily so on the it would have fallen by now.. The fall of Rome didn't happen over 10/20 years. It takes time to build up a shift in dynamics and a change in opinion. I too don't think America is there, but some of the shenanigans over the last 6 years is pushing them to the boil over... As to the not knowing, yes totally agree. I'm sure the people in Al'Andalus didn't think hum I think Rome is fallen when the Legion left Britain.
How did I miss a personalized dressing down from the man himself?! My phone must have known my fragile ego couldn't handle it.
However, quantifying the rapid fall of America is actually fairly easy; we're dead last among "civilized" nations in things like infant and maternal death rates, education, housing, social and financial mobility... the list is quite extensive.
So now you've piqued my interest and I must ask, how would you quantify the fall of America? Is there a specific event that has to happen for you to agree that we have fallen?
Before I start... I really love coming to America for its vast expanse and friendly people so please do not think I'm a hater! I'm not
Seriously though it is the minority ruining it for the majority as it is on all things. However, to spoil in such a way is becoming too common place there. It is broken and the rest of the world see that. Guns? Why? I recall being in an 'mom's and pops' restaurant when a man came in holding a grabby baby on one hip and a gun on the other.. He was so fat that if anyone stared shooting he would either have a coronary attack or not get up fast enough to fire and if he manged it he would scattergun the patrons in his panic! There is also taking a life.. He's not conditioned to accept that. So why have it? Stupid. I told my husband (ex-army close protection and retired) if the shit goes down grab his gun! I'd trust him as a retiree more than that man!
I have family who teach is kindergarten all the way to University in America and I always fear for them.. That can't be right surely in a so called just and forward country? Don't get me started on the abortion laws, racism, lack of affordable good health care and the NRA supporters then espousing the virtues of Christianity! I'm off on a rant so I'll stop there on that 😁
So, every super power also has its day too. Just look at the Roman Empire and also the British Empire! All implode.. We still have issues here too and in your new collective country you are going through what all of us have to as your history evolves and ages. . I also liken the USA to Europe, so each state there is a country here with totally differing history and views. The UK did what the Southern States did in 1860'ish, so even here we continue to evolve and change. Whether you like or of not. You do no different to us but in a media driven society it is seen globally.
As a Brit with Laws dating back over a thousand years, which move with the times, I really do not get the gun argument and hiding behind the 2nd ammendment. I also see rampant racism but we had that to in the 70s. Most ignorance which is slowly changing. The difference, you only gave up segregation less than 10 years earlier so you have a hell of a lot of catching up to do. And back to hiding behind the 2nd amendment these can change. Look at the end of slavery and the All men are equal under law! That changed to include freeing slaves nd slowly their rights in the 1960's, 100 years after emancipation. So why not the 2nd..I'm sure when it was all drafted they didn't mean semi-automatic rifles and shit like that..
We love America but its gilding is becoming very tarnished in the world's eye.
My guilty pleasure - Trumps Presidency was nicknamed The America Show in my house as every day was a giggle of what the hell has he said or done now!
Yep. America's original sin has always been white supremacy. That's how Trump won. He told all the white people he was going to take America back to the good old days, when blacks were only allowed to clean and serve the white family in the White House, not actually live there. Obama's power terrified the majority of whites. That's how we got Trump. The abortion thing is also because whites aren't having enough babies. The Supreme Court even admitted it.
I'm 40 years old, my great grandmother was born in 1888 and she told us stories about her grandmother's suffering on the Trail of Tears. We are a very young and very racist country. But white supremacy is a hell of a drug! We attack our own Capitol, just to keep white supremacy in power. We'll even re-elect dumb Mussolini just to keep "critical race theory" away from our white children.
America must have a truth and reconciliation about what this nation was actually founded on (theft, slavery, mercantilism) and where it's going in the future.
I absolutely agree with pretty much everything you said other than "Obama's power terrified the majority of whites." It certainly terrified a percentage of them and unfortunately they lived in states where the flawed electoral college votes ended up allowing for a Trump victory. I don't think Obama could have been voted into office and then reelected had most white people been opposed to him. I'm white and I thought he was wonderful! On the downside there was definitely a large portion of the population who did NOT like Ms. Clinton and/or could not picture a woman as president. Had someone like President Biden or Bernie Sanders been running against Trump I think he'd have been defeated. Unfortunately he wasn't and he has polarized our country so much that I don't see us ever reconciling. If he gets reelected in 2024 we're well and truly fucked.
I agree with you. Unfortunately my superpower is mouthing off when I get upset. You're absolutely right it is not a majority of whites. But it's not an insignificant minority, either. And Bernie would have crushed Trump. I live in Houston Texas and this week has been extra stressful. We have to keep fighting. ❤️
I have that same superpower and considering where you live I don't blame you a bit. I live in Idaho which is also pretty far-right so I have to be careful what I say around here as well. And yes, we do have to keep fighting!
Trump didn't win on white supremacy - you are taking a few small groups who just happen to not vote Democrat - and using that nasty brush to paint 75 MILLION people who are tired of not being listened to because we aren't radical. Not ONE person in the Congress has the slightest clue what it means to live paycheck to paycheck, to have to decide between paying for medication or the electric bill. And you can be sure that none of their family is having to worry about baby formula to feed their kids.
I agree with you, he did not win on white supremacy. However, his unfiltered rhetoric and unsavory views of women and minorities allowed the fringe elements in America to come boiling out from under whatever rock they had been hiding under and make a huge impact on the country. If the president could say what he did without any repercussions than so could they. You are also correct that most people in Congress do not have to worry about feeding their families or living paycheck to paycheck though some of them know exactly what it is like and are working to change that. They mostly happen to be on the Democratic side of the aisle, however. Pretty sure the Republicans still aren't listening to the little people having voted against a bill that would have helped feed babies while all the Democrats did. It would be nice if down the road the country can heal but I don't see that happening any time soon.
So, you've never been to Istanbul at all? There's a lot to see there besides Hagia Sophia -- which is, of course, magnificent. Topkapi Palace is cool, the Cisterns are impressive, The Blue Mosque is wonderful...the city walls are still massive, the hippodrome is still visible in places -- and so much more. You have to visit the Grand Bazaar and the Spice Bazaar. There is so much to see... and that's just in the Sultanahmet area. Then, there is the Golden Horn, Gallipoli, Troy, Nicaea and the Sea of Marmara and even Ephesus. I'd suggest at least one week but a long Jubilee-length weekend would be ok for a start.
Your having a piss up BBQ party who is on your guest list to make interesting? Genghis Khan, Edward iv and Churchill would make an interesting trio for me
I’m sure you’ve been asked this plenty of times, but I’d love to know: Would you be interested in researching history from another part of the world (outside of Europe etc) in detail and then write about it?
Just admit you're dying to go to Amsterdam and you're prepared to blackmail your publisher into making it happen. May I suggest Waterstones in the Kalverstraat? Not that I care one way or another of course 😇
Is it really?? I came across the hurdy-gurdy writing a piece on late 19th century dance hall girls- they were nicknamed ‘Hurdy-Gurdy Girls’. (Which I still think is great; but, still have no idea what a hurdy-gurdy sounds like 😆)
Check out the folk band Blowzabella; their lineup features a hurdy gurdy, amongst other 'ancient' instruments. Videos on YouTube - the Shrewsbury Festival video starts with a hurdy solo.
My daughter in San Diego, California, who is into medieval role-play, tells me this. She has a hurdy-gurdy she is learning to play. Hers has four strings, a crank, and something that emits a droning sound in various keys. It reminds me of the drone of a bagpipe. I have neither seen nor heard it, so I’m going on her description.
I've recently watched your interview with GRRM (per your recommendation in the podcast), and seeing as "Essex Dogs" is released this September, I just have to ask what are your favourite Medieval based fantasy/historical fiction books (or book series) and have they had an impact on your writing?
I know those are two different questions, but still. As a recommendation, if you haven't read Bernard Cornwell's "The Saxon Stories", the series is very good. Love ya, Dan. xoxo
Tell me something that will help deal at least intellectually with the senseless violence that permeates American society. Is that possible? The politicians who could do something are blinded by their lust for power. I saw a TV ad today for a candidate wanting to protect our 2nd amendment rights...I guess they'll want to arm the kids to defend themselves. It's pathetic
I live in the shadow of Knaresborough castle. How did Hugh de Moreville and his three fellow assassins, Reginald Fitzurse, William de Tracy and Richard le Bret manage to remain there for over a year after they murdered Thomas Becket? What finally drove them out?
Thinking about family relationships, those that were mutually beneficial and those that were antagonistic. Curious if the differences can be attributed to anything besides "personality." For example, the tensions between Edward II and Thomas of Lancaster vs the close relationship between Edward III and Henry of Grosmont. Or how Henry II was ,at one time or another, at war with some or all of his sons vs how Edward III managed to find useful roles for all of his sons and retained their loyalty and support.
I have always thought Eleanor, while pretty great in some respects, was very much an instigator and had a forceful will that contributed to those disputes. Good question.
When can we do the historic castle ABnB? 22 rooms would break down too...$$ per person...and add options like dye plant foraging, cooking and culminate with an authentic meal the last night. Anyone that get sick or dies will have signed a release, so no harm, no foul.
Ok I have a question that has been bothering me as I learn more about Henry vii and Maximillian: would there have been so much contention/ animosity between them if not influenced by Margaret Plantagenet duchess of burgundy ? Even before Max's support or Lambert Simnel there's some evidence of animosity but I can't figure out why? Especially since Henry supportive his fiancé at the time Anne of Brittany and Isabella and Ferdinand pushed to get them to reconcile -
I just challenged myself to record my podcast for next week al fresco on my phone, inspired by yours. Many bullfrog and bird sounds as I circled the pond. Thank you for inspiring me.
compared to today when you get "three hots and a cot" it was meant to be a deterrent. No one wanted to be racked or burned alive.... There is little reason to be afraid of committing a crime these days
What historical events do you think should be taught in every school worldwide, apart from the pupils' national history, as an essential part of becoming a responsible citizen? So "need to know", not "nice to know" (it's not forbidden to learn more 🙂 ). I was thinking slavery, discovery/colonialism, the holocaust, the nuclear threat - what am I missing, terrorism (very broad subject)...?
We'd better keep everybody in school for at least 20 years 🙄
I have been helping my son with 'The Abysynian conflict' which asked for a Peel paragraph (don't ask! I say a short essay, why mess with what works? 🙄) in regards to a very good cartoon of the time showing the British/French being pulled down a hill whilst on skates by a bulldog (this time Italy). In my explanation to a 12 year old not the least bit interested in history (yep I tried to put him up for adoption when he declared this!) I likened it to the current war in Ukraine. Do you see the similarities or are there better examples in history I can draw on to explain the build up to the 2nd world war and the collapse ultimately to The League of Nations?
If a livery badge was created for you as lord of the History, Etc. Substack newsletter for your retinue/subscribers to wear, what form would it take? What symbols/materials would be used, and what would they signify?
History frequently uses auxiliary disciplines such as paleography, psychology, economics, numismatics, art, etc. But it is with archeology that there is a greater feedback. Many people believe that archeology is for handsome, young, tough guys like Indiana Jones, and that instead historians have to be old, boring people wearing suits. Fortunately, there are people who are not from the environment, but who are clear about the difference between the two disciplines and always ask me why I chose to be a historian and not an archaeologist. I ask my students that same question and often get interesting answers. I don't know if someone here asked you this question before: why did you choose to be a historian and not an archaeologist?
And the eternal question: Should the historian always try to be completely impartial, at any cost, when narrating the facts?
Hi Dan, I was watching a documentary on the refurbishment of Big Ben last night here in Australia and was wondering is it finished yet? If not when will it be unveiled?
Will your new book with Marina Amaral include anything on the Ladies' Bridge (Waterloo Bridge)? I heard a little bit about it on a tour around London, and I was wondering why British women in WWII don't get the recognition that American women did through Rosie the Riveter, as if the fact that at least 60% of the women who put the bridge together should be hidden?
I always wondered if she would have kept the throne though. My understanding is that she started to show a backbone and her family was only going to be able to push her so far. Then I think she would have had a little "accident" and they would try to have her husband take her place. And I think that if her family hadn't been such asshats while she was in the Tower that Mary wouldn't have had her executed.
A co-worker of mine, who just recently discovered Secrets of Great British Castles on Netflix and may be going on a trip to London soon wants to know if you have a favorite Cafe? She's looking for locals' recommendations.
Cafe no but pub near The Tower... The Minories. She'll have a good time! Also check out Borough Market. Becoming a tourist trap as Instagram worthy but great snacks, people watching and pubs! Love a pub 😁
If you had to write a new book but it couldn’t be about medieval history or fiction set in that period, what would you write? About another historical period or a biography of someone from a different period or something wild like erotic gangster poetry?
Americans have the right to bear arms, but what the responsibility of bearing arms? Isn't it time America had that conversation with itself?
That does feel like a conversation that happens all-too regularly in the United States, although mostly without the two sides in the conversation listening to one another.
The all too frequent mass shootings negate whatever argument or justification the pro gun lobby put forward. That definitely is my final word on it. Definitely.
When I can't go to work, the grocery store, the theatre, etc. without fear of being murdered there is only one side, in a free, modern society that is.
and when are we going to address the mental health components? the policies that put criminals right back on the street? beefing up security in our schools? Stopping the insane "defund the police" movement? But it certainly doesn't help when people completely shut down the idea of talking to the other side.
Genuine question. Wouldn't a ban on the sale of automatic weapons be a step in the right direction? What need is there to own an automatic weapon? I understand the need for hand guns for personal defence and hunting rifles for hunting. Shotguns, you could make an argument for but why would anyone need an armour piercing machine gun? It makes no sense to me.
Automatic weapons are already banned. An AR is not an automatic weapon. It shoots the exact same rounds as a bolt action rifle - and takes magazines as well. The only thing is that it LOOKS scary. Armour piercing rounds are already banned. The problem is that too many people don't understand what guns do what, and which are already illegal.
OK. Let's call them what the law calls them. Assault weapons. My understanding is that 7 states have a ban on assault weapons. 43 states have no ban. Also there was a federal ban on assault weapons but it expired in the early 2000s I believe. A new law was proposed in 2013 but was defeated in the Senate. 60 to 40 I believe. Maybe it's time to try again? Or would it just be defeated again? A ban on assault weapons would be a step in the right direction. It wouldn't stop the mass shootings but it would limit the number of casualties. And given the divide, that seems to be the best people can hope for.
Spoken like a true politician. ❤️
I'm almost 100% certain that Jefferson and Franklin and all those dudes would pass laws to stop kids from being murdered at school.
Not at the risk of undoing all of the security they had. They literally had just fought a war, where there was no standing army - it was average men that refused to bow to a tyrannical government. I think the difference is in the way kids are raised today - when I went to high school we had guys in the school parking lot who had rifles in their trucks and we didn't have a single instance of school violence. Kids also used to be part of a family unit, taught respect and responsibility at an early age, and not to be coddled.
So true! I think it was Jefferson who said “ Hey! You know, we left this England place ’cause it was bogus; so if we don’t get some cool rules ourselves—pronto—we’ll just be bogus, too!” Wish they’d banned muskets in classrooms.
This question makes a large, sweeping (and incorrect) generalization about all US citizens and assumes it hasn't had this conversation. ...Maybe, don't do that.
My final word on it. America has an illness that is eating away at all that is great about US society. Maybe it's time for real action rather than conversation? It's an American problem and America has to fix it. Americans deserve better.
This statement is entirely correct.
*My issue is your original statement generalized all of us. Some US citizens fight this fight everyday. Every single day. It is our life's work. And it was our friend, a teacher, gunned down at MSD and another was the ER doc that is still dealing with what he saw. The 26 Acts of Kindness Movement was started by my husband and son and used by NBC. I'm asking you not to make generalized statements about all. At least half the citizens are trying.
Also, what nationality are you?
American here. IMO, Americans don't need a conversation since polls indicate we agree on what we want and need. We need Congress (specifically half of the Senate) to listen and act on our will
Congress won't listen until you are able to give it more money than the NRA does.
Sadly so, and undermining people's ability to vote ain't helping.
how about the desires of the citizens who want the borders secured? Who want criminals actually held accountable ? You'll find that when you get off the coasts and move further inland there are a lot more conservative people then you think. You'll find that there are a lot of people who are for RESPONSIBLE gun ownership - and that the NRA specifically focuses on gun safety and responsibility. Maybe it would help to actually learn what the NRA does....
My condolences to you and all the families caught up in this disease.. Your heart must stop everytime this happens..
This is so heartbreaking but incredible that you have been a part of the 26 acts of kindness
Actually, I've been thinking about this all day. It's such an awful thing. BUT, I popped on here with a history question regarding it: What were the medieval attitudes towards weapons? Was it generally understood that everyone walked around armed to go into battle? Did the ladies all have hidden daggers in their underclothes? (Kidding...maybe...)
I believe I came across the fact that even in our "Old West" there were laws and rules regarding leaving weapons at home before entering public places. It's wasn't as "Wild West-y" in that regard as we imagine sometimes.
So, what were the medieval attitudes?
This IS a good question, and in some senses the Second Amendment is a classic statement of attitudes to peacekeeping that derived from medieval England. Before a standing police force, the responsibility for security/peacekeeping (domestically and of the coasts/borders) fell upon communities. So it was the duty and responsibility of communities to arm themselves for that purpose. There's a direct line from legislation of the C13th in England to 'A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State...' Of course, in every C21st democracy we now have handed over the responsibility of peacekeeping and security to the state in the form of policing and a standing army. So not only is there no need for communities and individuals to arm themselves for the purpose of keeping the peace and defending the realm, it is often disadvantageous to the functioning of a 'free' society to allow them to do so.
The problem (I think) is that the Second Amendment is a product of a time in which the transition from community defence to state-organised security was very much in flux, and when there was a widespread fear that to give the state a monopoly on bearing arms for the purpose of peacekeeping was to invite tyranny. (If you line up today on the side of 'defund the police' you are probably of this mindset...) In other words, the Second Amendment takes a very particular line in favour of medieval policing/security systems and against what we would now (in most countries) consider a normal feature of the nation state. That is a problem from time to time, and a bug in a US Constitution which in many/most other ways is a wonderfully farsighted document which underpins the functioning of the most important democracy in the world.
I think what is the bigger problem here is that this country is going down a dangerous path, with a lot of crime, an open border and the economy in tatters. You are never going to make the argument that people can't defend themselves - and it only seeks to further divide the country when people refuse to listen to the other side. There is a whole host of problems that should be addressed and laws on the books enforced.
Wasn't the 2nd Amendment put in place after the Revolutionary War, when the standing army was eliminated in America? Hence, the need for a militia, with their arms ready to defend the state. Once the standing army was put in place, I think after the War of 1812, the need for a militia should have been no longer needed. Of course, much of population was armed, for shooting squirrels and such.
The second amendment isn't there just in regards to militia. It is also so that if there is a tyrannical government that the people can rise up if needed. It is also worth noting that it isn't just guns that you might think of under the second amendment. The 2016 Supreme Court ruling of Castano v Massachusetts ruled that tasers/stun guns were also protected. The 2nd amendment was never about hunting - it was always as a way to protect people's rights. If a country came and invaded our country, the second amendment allows the common people to come together to repel that invasion, even if they are not members of the military. For a long time, the Supreme Court held the opinion that the Second Amendment applied only to the federal government. They said that it did not prevent state governments from regulating gun ownership or use. Two court cases changed this opinion. In District of Columbia v. Heller in 2008, the Supreme Court invalidated a federal law that made it illegal for nearly all citizens in Washington, D.C. to own guns. Then, in McDonald v. Chicago in 2010, the Supreme Court outlawed a similar citywide ban on hand guns. Laws have passed that raises the minimum age to buy a weapon, allows cops to take guns from mentally disturbed people, imposes a waiting period when purchasing a gun, and bans bump stocks (devices that can be attached to a gun to make it fire more rapidly). In addition it is against the law for a felon to have weapons. The biggest problems come from the statistics. Something like 67% of all mass shootings are not done with a rifle/AR-15 they are actually committed with handguns. Also if you look at the last decade of "mass shootings" - once you take out armed robberies, domestic disputes and gang violence the number of shootings drops to just over a handful. The majority of the mass shootings listed in the database of the Violence Project show that California which has some of the strictest laws has the most mass shootings. Vermont, which has the least gun laws has had one "mass shooting" where an individual who ad lost their kids to CPS shot the social worker and then the three family members that had reported her in the first place. If a man shoots his wife and kids, and then kills himself, that is technically a mass shooting. A gangbanger in Chicago does a drive by of a house, and more then three victims - that is a mass shooting. The worst issue I have seen though is in Washington State there are now cities where they will no longer assign officers to rape cases. So it is on the women to find a way to protect themselves, because no one is going to be looking out for them. It is really a multi-faceted issue, and no one thing is going to fix it. But people don't even want to consider more then one thing at a time - they are like horses with blinders on.
Appreciate your intelligent and well-stated response. I have been a gun owner all of my life, mainly as guns used to be for hunting. We didn't need machine guns to hunt a deer or a duck. Now, when hunting is at a all time low, gun ownership is at an all time high. It is all about shooting people, and we are doing that at a rate that is completely unacceptable. I live in Redding CA, and in the last couple of weeks we have had multiple shootings, yes, mainly family members shooting each other, and one armed homeless man shooting a Taco Bell employee (high school kid) in a botched robbery. Oh, also had a high school girl bring her gun to school. No shooting, but the police had to disarm her. I used to ride ambulance, am a Navy vet, and retired RN, and while I was on the front line in responding to emergencies, and I have never seen anything like what is happening now.? NRA and gun manufacturers say buy more guns ($$$), and arm everyone. I can't see a solution short of what New Zealand and Australia have done. But we need to come together and do something. You seem smarter than I am. Any idea of solutions? Thanks.
This is a regular topic of conversation between me and my coworkers. I am apparently the odd one out, being a Nebraskan who HATES guns, but we all agree on a few things.
1. Handguns for protection, perfectly reasonable.
2. Rifles for hunting (including shotguns), perfectly reasonable.
3. Requiring a background check before being able to purchase a weapon, perfectly reasonable.
4. Limiting the number of bullets in a magazine-some debate on that due to the cost of the magazines.
5. Access to military grade weaponry (as in AR-anything)-absolutely no civilian should be able to purchase these.
6. Mandatory training-absolutely agree.
7. Mental health evaluations-absolutely agree.
The majority of responsible gun owners have no issue with laws and regulations. So, why does it seem like Americans are so irresponsible with gun ownership? To be honest, it's what the media puts out. Is it a problem that so many people have access to guns who really shouldn't? Yes. Is it going to stop someone who has deep rooted hatred? No. We've seen that with the people who have driven their vehicles into parades not caring who they hurt in the process.
I'm with you on most everything except number 5. An AR-15 is not a military grade weapon. It functions exactly the same as, and fires the same size rounds as a hunting rifle. Literally the only thing that makes people think they are military grade is the way that they look. It is always interesting to me that people have no issues with a double barrel shotgun (which does an insane amount of damage) but are against an AR-15. I've worked with both a body farm and as a first responder and I will say that the wound from an AR is much easier and less destructive then a shotgun blast. The real truth is that Democrats want ALL guns, not just the scary black ones.
Yeah, that's a lie. We don't want ALL guns. That's a nice little fallacy the GOP has been pumping out years.
I hate guns in general for personal reasons, which simply means that I will never own one.
.
As far as the difference between rifles and shotguns, yes the pellets from shotguns shells can cause a lot of damage at short range, but a shotgun can only fire one or two shells before for having to be reloaded, whereas an AR can fire up to 100 times before needing to be reloaded. You could have the fastest shotgun reload time on the planet and not get anywhere close to the amount of damage an AR can do in the same time.
Considering that extended magazines have been banned in many places now I am going to have to agree to disagree. Many hunting rifles are capable of accepting magazines as well, which means not needing to reload as often. So please explain what makes a hunting rifle acceptable and an AR-15 NOT, when they function exactly the same and the only difference is the way it looks....
at the risk of winding everyone up, name one law that would ultimately make a difference other then banning "scary guns"? Until we can agree on the fact that there is a serious mental health crisis in this country, combined with the increasingly liberal policies that reward criminals. As much hatred as there is towards the NRA I encourage people to actually learn what they do - gun responsibility and safety are high on the list of concerns. But at the end of the day - until this country stops the division, and insisting that opposing political parties need to be gotten rid of this isn't going to change. As Dan says, it is hard to get both sides to the table AND be willing to cross the aisle.
It's very strange that "mental health issues" only murder American children at school, and Americans at the grocery store, movie theatre, church.... we are the ONLY country where "mental health issues" slaughter hundreds of our own citizens every year.
What makes our "mental health issues" so much more deadly than literally every other country on earth?
The answer to your question is readily available access to guns. I'm not naive enough to say that it wouldn't be exactly the same in other countries if guns were as easily accessible. But they are not. That's the difference.
If you take away guns, bad guys are still going to get their hands on them. The only thing you are doing is keeping people from being able to defend themselves. Other countries who got rid of guns didn't get rid of all violence - they simply used different weapons. Chicago is a gun free city - has been since 1982 - and look at the amount of gun violence there. Making them illegal certainly didn't stop the violence, did it?
Chicago has 10s of thousands of weapons that cross over from Indiana (just a few short miles away, for those on the thread in Europe) every year. Until this problem is addressed federally there will be significant gun trafficking within the US. It’s well documented and a real problem.
Is Illinois a gun free state? If not, then Chicago being a gun free city in reality means little. Honest question, you don't have to answer, do you think an assault weapon ban would make mass shootings less likely? I think it would because they wouldn't be available to spur of the moment mass shooters. Yes you will still have shootings but not as many innocents will lose their life. Or is the mass shootings the price people are willing to pay for the right to bear arms? To me, that's a very high price indeed.
Illinois require you to have a firearms id that you have to go to the police to get. So getting rid of guns still doesnt have an impact. Add in that most gun crimes in IL happen with hand guns and an “assault” weapons ban wouldn’t have helped.
The lack of places to put mentally ill people who are a danger to themselves or others for one. The lack of a functional system for those who have documented mental health issues so that they DON'T get to purchase guns in the first place... the lack of personal responsibility and respect from young people.... I'm not suggesting that mental health is the only reason, but it is a piece of the puzzle that needs to be taken seriously. When I was in high school a lot of the guys (and some of us girls) had window racks with our hunting rifles in our trucks, on school grounds no less, and there was never a hint of violence. Look at what has changed in the last 20+ years other then just the guns. Look at the whole picture - it is a shift in values....
When are you going to visit the US again? I know it is a gun infested hellhole, but my friends and I would love to see you (we have driven to Louisville and Baltimore to see you speak before and it was wonderful!
"Gun infested hellhole" is the best description I've read in a while
Sad but true!
Agreed!
How about a game of "Behead, befriend, become" for the Plantagenet monarchs, what you thinking? Self explanatory but which monarch would you wanna get rid of, which would you want to hang with on a daily basis, and which would you like to have been?
I have never heard of this game but it reminds of "marry, F, kill" now THAT would also be an interesting one for @dan - which medieval queen would he choose for that?
I'm very much down to hear both answers!!
Stephen vs Matilda, the Wars of the Roses, Charles I vs the Parliamentarians... Which English Civil War had the greatest impact on the country as a whole?
Civil War without question... remember they CUT THE FUCKING HEAD OFF THE KING AND ABOLISHED THE MONARCHY... the pivot from a 'medieval' monarchy to a modern constitutional monarchy by no means happened instantly in the 1640s, but by the end of the C17th it was well underway. The solution to Anarchy and WOTR was by and large 'competent non-dickhead person restores system with minor reform'. The Civil War was much bigger deal in short and long term.
and honestly, I feel like you can blame Henry VIII for setting the precedent for lopping off the heads of royalty.
What did you think you might want to do for a living before history got hold of you?
Pimp, lowlife mafia lawyer, bagman, getaway driver, cheque-forger, spy
One thing that pops to mind - a lot of history majors I went to school with went into politics........so, that covers a ton of the choices you mention above.
I majored in History and became a paleontologist LOL
Eva- I was going to leave the gun debate alone, but it you seem to be itching for someone to ‘reach out to the other side’.
I am married to someone else who was a history/biology major. He went on to be a surgeon, switched specialties, and now is a psychiatrist running a large out-patient facility in our town. Yep, that’s right mental health. It’s a problem for sure.
But I don’t wake up from vivid, nasty nightmares after one of these mass shooting because of his patients alone. There are guards on every floor trained to tackle and subdue out of control patients.
I dream that they are bringing GUNS with them to their appointments. And, it won’t be the doctor they reach first..it will be the waiting room with families and the single mom at reception who doesn’t make the salary or have the benefits my family gets out of the deal.
You are talking about the ‘other side’. I grew up in gun country too- Texas and CO.
23 yrs ago I watched my friends at Columbine (I went to the neighboring school) get marched out after that shit show, but what I remember from that day was different. I sat for a couple hours with my friend who had attended Columbine and ran track with Dylan Klebold’s big brother. She recalled how the shooter’s parents were good enough people to host the team picnics and were involved, loving parents.
We wanted to find ‘bad guys’ even that day…. but, who to blame?
It’s the GUNS, Eva.
Call them what you want (assault weapons, ARs, whatev) they all do the same thing in the end.
I will bring this somewhat back to history-
A few years ago the hospital built a brand new facility for psychiatry, and staff and families were invited on a tour prior to opening . We had recently gotten back from a trip to France where I had hired a guide to take us around Carcassonne and give us the ins and outs of the castle defenses. It was an incredibly interesting tour, but the kids were bored silly.
My older daughter went along on the psych ward tour, and afterwards looked at us and said “it’s like that guy from the castle designed this place’.
Yep honey. We are now living in a modern day fortress to keep us safe.
That’s not freedom.
Thank you. Eva's been itching for a fight here and gave away her game earlier by using the code words "open borders." We don't have open borders in the US ffs, but the Fox News crowd throws that around so that we continue to live in fear of a boogie man that doesn't exist and the gun makers and NRA continue to buy off our politicians and weak-minded folks who need to feel unique and a member of a special group parrot their nonsense talking points. It's disingenuous at best, willfully ignorant or evil at its worst.
Eva is a troll who you gave a way too thoughtful response to, but I appreciate your patience.
Well. I’ve been stuck inside with Covid this past week and am probably spending too much time online.😝
Usually getting that wound up is not my best look, but glad it spoke to someone.
In a previous podcast, I believe Dan said he expected to become a lawyer but couldn't be bothered to fill the forms in.
And we are the better for it 😏
If you could be part of one monarch's court in British history, which court would you join?
Charles II, but I'd take condoms
What are your thoughts on apologizing for historical wrongs?
Insincere hand-wringing meets victim tourism, usually.
You have a busy family. How do you schedule your writing and research time. Is it written in stone in advance or is each day different?
I try to stick to a good routine that involves early mornings, daily exercise, doing most of the day's work before 3pm and a good hour 9pm-10pm, not drinking too much before Thursday. It varies with the seasons and with the impending-ness of deadlines.
Hi Dan - what recreational drugs did our medieval fore-bearers enjoy? ie - how did the Tudors get off their tits? 😃
What does the rapid fall of America look like from your perspective across the pond?
If America had been falling for as long as people have been saying it is falling, I suspect it might have fallen by now. We may indeed be living at the end of history, but neither you nor anyone else have any way of knowing whether that is so.
OMG! I'm disagreeing with the venerable Jones! 😱 Please don't hold that over me!
Not necessarily so on the it would have fallen by now.. The fall of Rome didn't happen over 10/20 years. It takes time to build up a shift in dynamics and a change in opinion. I too don't think America is there, but some of the shenanigans over the last 6 years is pushing them to the boil over... As to the not knowing, yes totally agree. I'm sure the people in Al'Andalus didn't think hum I think Rome is fallen when the Legion left Britain.
How did I miss a personalized dressing down from the man himself?! My phone must have known my fragile ego couldn't handle it.
However, quantifying the rapid fall of America is actually fairly easy; we're dead last among "civilized" nations in things like infant and maternal death rates, education, housing, social and financial mobility... the list is quite extensive.
So now you've piqued my interest and I must ask, how would you quantify the fall of America? Is there a specific event that has to happen for you to agree that we have fallen?
You're a bunch of gun toting nutters?
Before I start... I really love coming to America for its vast expanse and friendly people so please do not think I'm a hater! I'm not
Seriously though it is the minority ruining it for the majority as it is on all things. However, to spoil in such a way is becoming too common place there. It is broken and the rest of the world see that. Guns? Why? I recall being in an 'mom's and pops' restaurant when a man came in holding a grabby baby on one hip and a gun on the other.. He was so fat that if anyone stared shooting he would either have a coronary attack or not get up fast enough to fire and if he manged it he would scattergun the patrons in his panic! There is also taking a life.. He's not conditioned to accept that. So why have it? Stupid. I told my husband (ex-army close protection and retired) if the shit goes down grab his gun! I'd trust him as a retiree more than that man!
I have family who teach is kindergarten all the way to University in America and I always fear for them.. That can't be right surely in a so called just and forward country? Don't get me started on the abortion laws, racism, lack of affordable good health care and the NRA supporters then espousing the virtues of Christianity! I'm off on a rant so I'll stop there on that 😁
So, every super power also has its day too. Just look at the Roman Empire and also the British Empire! All implode.. We still have issues here too and in your new collective country you are going through what all of us have to as your history evolves and ages. . I also liken the USA to Europe, so each state there is a country here with totally differing history and views. The UK did what the Southern States did in 1860'ish, so even here we continue to evolve and change. Whether you like or of not. You do no different to us but in a media driven society it is seen globally.
As a Brit with Laws dating back over a thousand years, which move with the times, I really do not get the gun argument and hiding behind the 2nd ammendment. I also see rampant racism but we had that to in the 70s. Most ignorance which is slowly changing. The difference, you only gave up segregation less than 10 years earlier so you have a hell of a lot of catching up to do. And back to hiding behind the 2nd amendment these can change. Look at the end of slavery and the All men are equal under law! That changed to include freeing slaves nd slowly their rights in the 1960's, 100 years after emancipation. So why not the 2nd..I'm sure when it was all drafted they didn't mean semi-automatic rifles and shit like that..
We love America but its gilding is becoming very tarnished in the world's eye.
My guilty pleasure - Trumps Presidency was nicknamed The America Show in my house as every day was a giggle of what the hell has he said or done now!
Yep. America's original sin has always been white supremacy. That's how Trump won. He told all the white people he was going to take America back to the good old days, when blacks were only allowed to clean and serve the white family in the White House, not actually live there. Obama's power terrified the majority of whites. That's how we got Trump. The abortion thing is also because whites aren't having enough babies. The Supreme Court even admitted it.
I'm 40 years old, my great grandmother was born in 1888 and she told us stories about her grandmother's suffering on the Trail of Tears. We are a very young and very racist country. But white supremacy is a hell of a drug! We attack our own Capitol, just to keep white supremacy in power. We'll even re-elect dumb Mussolini just to keep "critical race theory" away from our white children.
America must have a truth and reconciliation about what this nation was actually founded on (theft, slavery, mercantilism) and where it's going in the future.
I absolutely agree with pretty much everything you said other than "Obama's power terrified the majority of whites." It certainly terrified a percentage of them and unfortunately they lived in states where the flawed electoral college votes ended up allowing for a Trump victory. I don't think Obama could have been voted into office and then reelected had most white people been opposed to him. I'm white and I thought he was wonderful! On the downside there was definitely a large portion of the population who did NOT like Ms. Clinton and/or could not picture a woman as president. Had someone like President Biden or Bernie Sanders been running against Trump I think he'd have been defeated. Unfortunately he wasn't and he has polarized our country so much that I don't see us ever reconciling. If he gets reelected in 2024 we're well and truly fucked.
I agree with you. Unfortunately my superpower is mouthing off when I get upset. You're absolutely right it is not a majority of whites. But it's not an insignificant minority, either. And Bernie would have crushed Trump. I live in Houston Texas and this week has been extra stressful. We have to keep fighting. ❤️
I have that same superpower and considering where you live I don't blame you a bit. I live in Idaho which is also pretty far-right so I have to be careful what I say around here as well. And yes, we do have to keep fighting!
Trump didn't win on white supremacy - you are taking a few small groups who just happen to not vote Democrat - and using that nasty brush to paint 75 MILLION people who are tired of not being listened to because we aren't radical. Not ONE person in the Congress has the slightest clue what it means to live paycheck to paycheck, to have to decide between paying for medication or the electric bill. And you can be sure that none of their family is having to worry about baby formula to feed their kids.
I agree with you, he did not win on white supremacy. However, his unfiltered rhetoric and unsavory views of women and minorities allowed the fringe elements in America to come boiling out from under whatever rock they had been hiding under and make a huge impact on the country. If the president could say what he did without any repercussions than so could they. You are also correct that most people in Congress do not have to worry about feeding their families or living paycheck to paycheck though some of them know exactly what it is like and are working to change that. They mostly happen to be on the Democratic side of the aisle, however. Pretty sure the Republicans still aren't listening to the little people having voted against a bill that would have helped feed babies while all the Democrats did. It would be nice if down the road the country can heal but I don't see that happening any time soon.
Hey Dan,
What is the one historical place that you’ve never visited that you really want to see? Thanks!
Covid nixed my trip to Hagia Sophia and I still haven't got back to Istanbul. A good friend told me it's a good time to buy shoes there, too...
So, you've never been to Istanbul at all? There's a lot to see there besides Hagia Sophia -- which is, of course, magnificent. Topkapi Palace is cool, the Cisterns are impressive, The Blue Mosque is wonderful...the city walls are still massive, the hippodrome is still visible in places -- and so much more. You have to visit the Grand Bazaar and the Spice Bazaar. There is so much to see... and that's just in the Sultanahmet area. Then, there is the Golden Horn, Gallipoli, Troy, Nicaea and the Sea of Marmara and even Ephesus. I'd suggest at least one week but a long Jubilee-length weekend would be ok for a start.
That was lovely thanks! 😀
Do you have any plans to do an historical tour of the UK? Like the one in France.
Not the UK, no. But somewhere..
Istanbul?
Your having a piss up BBQ party who is on your guest list to make interesting? Genghis Khan, Edward iv and Churchill would make an interesting trio for me
Hopefully me! I'll be on the list! 😁
And what are your thoughts on boozy bbq’d bananas with lashings of squirty cream and chocolate shavings for dessert?
Who would you cast in the leading roles if you novel Essex Dogs was turned into a movie?
If you could bring back an item of medieval fashion to 2022 and wear it as part of your everyday attire. What would it be and why?
Please, not the codpiece!
I’m sure you’ve been asked this plenty of times, but I’d love to know: Would you be interested in researching history from another part of the world (outside of Europe etc) in detail and then write about it?
Will you be doing a book tour when Essex Dogs is released?
Yes looks that way - U.K. for sure and poss US/Canada/Australia too
Hopefully Canada doesn't just mean Toronto!
Hopefully Canada means everything BUT Toronto! :)
Could you come to Leeds?
Leeds would be perfect for me too 😃
Just admit you're dying to go to Amsterdam and you're prepared to blackmail your publisher into making it happen. May I suggest Waterstones in the Kalverstraat? Not that I care one way or another of course 😇
Make one of them Bookmark in Spalding!!
Excellent news 😃
What's your take on what happened at Oak Island? What theory do you think is most plausible, or do you have your own?
If the princes in the tower had not “disappeared” how might things have been different?
So what Medieval musical instruments would you play to perform modern rock and roll music? (I understand the hurdy-gurdy is making a comeback.)
Is it really?? I came across the hurdy-gurdy writing a piece on late 19th century dance hall girls- they were nicknamed ‘Hurdy-Gurdy Girls’. (Which I still think is great; but, still have no idea what a hurdy-gurdy sounds like 😆)
Check out the folk band Blowzabella; their lineup features a hurdy gurdy, amongst other 'ancient' instruments. Videos on YouTube - the Shrewsbury Festival video starts with a hurdy solo.
My daughter in San Diego, California, who is into medieval role-play, tells me this. She has a hurdy-gurdy she is learning to play. Hers has four strings, a crank, and something that emits a droning sound in various keys. It reminds me of the drone of a bagpipe. I have neither seen nor heard it, so I’m going on her description.
I found a sample of one online - very cool! I didn't realize its history went back to the Middle Ages.
I've recently watched your interview with GRRM (per your recommendation in the podcast), and seeing as "Essex Dogs" is released this September, I just have to ask what are your favourite Medieval based fantasy/historical fiction books (or book series) and have they had an impact on your writing?
I know those are two different questions, but still. As a recommendation, if you haven't read Bernard Cornwell's "The Saxon Stories", the series is very good. Love ya, Dan. xoxo
Tell me something that will help deal at least intellectually with the senseless violence that permeates American society. Is that possible? The politicians who could do something are blinded by their lust for power. I saw a TV ad today for a candidate wanting to protect our 2nd amendment rights...I guess they'll want to arm the kids to defend themselves. It's pathetic
Sorry
I live in the shadow of Knaresborough castle. How did Hugh de Moreville and his three fellow assassins, Reginald Fitzurse, William de Tracy and Richard le Bret manage to remain there for over a year after they murdered Thomas Becket? What finally drove them out?
If you could choose a song (any song) to represent the theme song for your life, which one would you choose and why?
How are you feeling about the podcasts now? Finally feeling “official” or still like a poser just doing voice memos? (You’re doing great btw)
Thinking about family relationships, those that were mutually beneficial and those that were antagonistic. Curious if the differences can be attributed to anything besides "personality." For example, the tensions between Edward II and Thomas of Lancaster vs the close relationship between Edward III and Henry of Grosmont. Or how Henry II was ,at one time or another, at war with some or all of his sons vs how Edward III managed to find useful roles for all of his sons and retained their loyalty and support.
I have always thought Eleanor, while pretty great in some respects, was very much an instigator and had a forceful will that contributed to those disputes. Good question.
You get to travel back to the 15th century and take one modern drink with you to blow their minds…what are you taking?
When can we do the historic castle ABnB? 22 rooms would break down too...$$ per person...and add options like dye plant foraging, cooking and culminate with an authentic meal the last night. Anyone that get sick or dies will have signed a release, so no harm, no foul.
Wow..I am as fascinated by these questions as I am with Mr. Jones' responses
Is the mystery person still watching netflix in your tesla at night?
Ok I have a question that has been bothering me as I learn more about Henry vii and Maximillian: would there have been so much contention/ animosity between them if not influenced by Margaret Plantagenet duchess of burgundy ? Even before Max's support or Lambert Simnel there's some evidence of animosity but I can't figure out why? Especially since Henry supportive his fiancé at the time Anne of Brittany and Isabella and Ferdinand pushed to get them to reconcile -
I just challenged myself to record my podcast for next week al fresco on my phone, inspired by yours. Many bullfrog and bird sounds as I circled the pond. Thank you for inspiring me.
Non historical question- what should I get for my next tattoo?🤔
Why was medieval punishment and torture so gruesome? Where did the torture methods originate?
compared to today when you get "three hots and a cot" it was meant to be a deterrent. No one wanted to be racked or burned alive.... There is little reason to be afraid of committing a crime these days
What historical events do you think should be taught in every school worldwide, apart from the pupils' national history, as an essential part of becoming a responsible citizen? So "need to know", not "nice to know" (it's not forbidden to learn more 🙂 ). I was thinking slavery, discovery/colonialism, the holocaust, the nuclear threat - what am I missing, terrorism (very broad subject)...?
We'd better keep everybody in school for at least 20 years 🙄
Cream cake or Crisps?
What is your pick?
Hi Dan. Hope you are well.
Going with the rent-a-castle theme, what would be your ultimate rental if all were available?
Cheers!
I have been helping my son with 'The Abysynian conflict' which asked for a Peel paragraph (don't ask! I say a short essay, why mess with what works? 🙄) in regards to a very good cartoon of the time showing the British/French being pulled down a hill whilst on skates by a bulldog (this time Italy). In my explanation to a 12 year old not the least bit interested in history (yep I tried to put him up for adoption when he declared this!) I likened it to the current war in Ukraine. Do you see the similarities or are there better examples in history I can draw on to explain the build up to the 2nd world war and the collapse ultimately to The League of Nations?
I’m going to visit Dublin this next couple of days. Any (historical) tips?
Is there enough primary or reliable contemporary material for you to write about the Kett rebellion?
If a livery badge was created for you as lord of the History, Etc. Substack newsletter for your retinue/subscribers to wear, what form would it take? What symbols/materials would be used, and what would they signify?
If you could go back and live in 1 period or under 1 king who would it be and why?
History frequently uses auxiliary disciplines such as paleography, psychology, economics, numismatics, art, etc. But it is with archeology that there is a greater feedback. Many people believe that archeology is for handsome, young, tough guys like Indiana Jones, and that instead historians have to be old, boring people wearing suits. Fortunately, there are people who are not from the environment, but who are clear about the difference between the two disciplines and always ask me why I chose to be a historian and not an archaeologist. I ask my students that same question and often get interesting answers. I don't know if someone here asked you this question before: why did you choose to be a historian and not an archaeologist?
And the eternal question: Should the historian always try to be completely impartial, at any cost, when narrating the facts?
Hi Dan, I was watching a documentary on the refurbishment of Big Ben last night here in Australia and was wondering is it finished yet? If not when will it be unveiled?
What reactions have you had from academic historians to your work? Is it respect in general, or envy/shade?
All of the above lol
Why did you decide to study history over other subjects?
Will your new book with Marina Amaral include anything on the Ladies' Bridge (Waterloo Bridge)? I heard a little bit about it on a tour around London, and I was wondering why British women in WWII don't get the recognition that American women did through Rosie the Riveter, as if the fact that at least 60% of the women who put the bridge together should be hidden?
What might have happened if Queen Jane Grey had kept the throne and had direct (male) heirs?
I always wondered if she would have kept the throne though. My understanding is that she started to show a backbone and her family was only going to be able to push her so far. Then I think she would have had a little "accident" and they would try to have her husband take her place. And I think that if her family hadn't been such asshats while she was in the Tower that Mary wouldn't have had her executed.
A co-worker of mine, who just recently discovered Secrets of Great British Castles on Netflix and may be going on a trip to London soon wants to know if you have a favorite Cafe? She's looking for locals' recommendations.
Cafe no but pub near The Tower... The Minories. She'll have a good time! Also check out Borough Market. Becoming a tourist trap as Instagram worthy but great snacks, people watching and pubs! Love a pub 😁
If you had to write a new book but it couldn’t be about medieval history or fiction set in that period, what would you write? About another historical period or a biography of someone from a different period or something wild like erotic gangster poetry?