|
Post by hi224 on Sept 28, 2017 6:51:05 GMT
was that an urban legend or is their a basis at all?.
|
|
|
Post by RiP, IMDb on Sept 28, 2017 9:57:12 GMT
was that an urban legend or is their a basis at all?. Urban legend.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 28, 2017 11:29:56 GMT
Historical explanations Many Flemish immigrants arrived in eastern England during the 12th century, and they were persecuted after Henry II became king in 1154; a large number of them were killed near Bury St Edmunds in 1173 at the Battle of Fornham fought between Henry II and Robert de Beaumont, 3rd Earl of Leicester. Paul Harris has suggested that the green children's Flemish parents perished during a period of civil strife and that the children may have come from the village of Fornham St Martin, slightly to the north of Bury St Edmunds, where a settlement of Flemish fullers existed at that time. They may have fled and ultimately wandered to Woolpit. Disoriented, bewildered, and dressed in unfamiliar Flemish clothes, the children would have presented a very strange spectacle to the Woolpit villagers.[20] The children's colour could be explained by green sickness, the result of a dietary deficiency.[1] Brian Haughton considers Harris's explanation to be plausible, and the one most widely accepted,[21] although not without its difficulties. For instance, he suggests it is unlikely that an educated local man like Richard de Calne would not have recognised the language spoken by the children as being Flemish.[22] Historian Derek Brewer's explanation is even more prosaic: The likely core of the matter is that these very small children, herding or following flocks, strayed from their forest village, spoke little, and (in modern terms) did not know their own home address. They were probably suffering from chlorosis, a deficiency disease which gives the skin a greenish tint, hence the term "green sickness". With a better diet it disappears.[23] Jeffrey Jerome Cohen proposes that the story is about racial difference, and "allows William to write obliquely about the Welsh":[24] the green children are a memory of England's past and the violent conquest of the indigenous Britons by the Anglo-Saxons followed by the Norman invasion. William of Newburgh reluctantly[25] includes the story of the green children in his account of a largely unified England, which Cohen juxtaposes with Geoffrey of Monmouth's The History of the Kings of Britain, a book that according to William is full of "gushing and untrammeled lying".[26] Geoffrey's history offers accounts of previous kings and kingdoms of various racial identities, whereas William's England is one in which all peoples are either assimilated or pushed to the boundaries. According to Cohen, the green children represent a dual intrusion into William's unified vision of England. On one hand they are a reminder of the racial and cultural differences between Normans and Anglo-Saxons, given the children's claim to have come from St Martin's Land, named after Martin of Tours; the only other time William mentions that saint is in reference to St Martin's Abbey in Hastings, which commemorates the Norman victory in 1066.[27] But the children also embody the earlier inhabitants of the British Isles, the "Welsh (and Irish and Scots) who [had been] forcibly anglicized ... The Green Children resurface another story that William had been unable to tell, one in which English paninsular dominion becomes a troubled assumption rather than a foregone conclusion."[14] The boy in particular, who dies rather than become assimilated, represents "an adjacent world that cannot be annexed ... an otherness that will perish to endure".[28] Green children of WoolpitYes i am using wikipedia and in contrast to what people seem to think its not a bad source.
|
|
|
Post by RiP, IMDb on Sept 28, 2017 22:21:15 GMT
Historical explanations
Many Flemish immigrants arrived in eastern England during the 12th century, and they were persecuted after Henry II became king in 1154; a large number of them were killed near Bury St Edmunds in 1173 at the Battle of Fornham fought between Henry II and Robert de Beaumont, 3rd Earl of Leicester. Paul Harris has suggested that the green children's Flemish parents perished during a period of civil strife and that the children may have come from the village of Fornham St Martin, slightly to the north of Bury St Edmunds, where a settlement of Flemish fullers existed at that time. They may have fled and ultimately wandered to Woolpit. Disoriented, bewildered, and dressed in unfamiliar Flemish clothes, the children would have presented a very strange spectacle to the Woolpit villagers.[20] The children's colour could be explained by green sickness, the result of a dietary deficiency.[1] Brian Haughton considers Harris's explanation to be plausible, and the one most widely accepted,[21] although not without its difficulties. For instance, he suggests it is unlikely that an educated local man like Richard de Calne would not have recognised the language spoken by the children as being Flemish.[22]
Historian Derek Brewer's explanation is even more prosaic:
The likely core of the matter is that these very small children, herding or following flocks, strayed from their forest village, spoke little, and (in modern terms) did not know their own home address. They were probably suffering from chlorosis, a deficiency disease which gives the skin a greenish tint, hence the term "green sickness". With a better diet it disappears.[23]
Jeffrey Jerome Cohen proposes that the story is about racial difference, and "allows William to write obliquely about the Welsh":[24] the green children are a memory of England's past and the violent conquest of the indigenous Britons by the Anglo-Saxons followed by the Norman invasion. William of Newburgh reluctantly[25] includes the story of the green children in his account of a largely unified England, which Cohen juxtaposes with Geoffrey of Monmouth's The History of the Kings of Britain, a book that according to William is full of "gushing and untrammeled lying".[26] Geoffrey's history offers accounts of previous kings and kingdoms of various racial identities, whereas William's England is one in which all peoples are either assimilated or pushed to the boundaries. According to Cohen, the green children represent a dual intrusion into William's unified vision of England. On one hand they are a reminder of the racial and cultural differences between Normans and Anglo-Saxons, given the children's claim to have come from St Martin's Land, named after Martin of Tours; the only other time William mentions that saint is in reference to St Martin's Abbey in Hastings, which commemorates the Norman victory in 1066.[27] But the children also embody the earlier inhabitants of the British Isles, the "Welsh (and Irish and Scots) who [had been] forcibly anglicized ... The Green Children resurface another story that William had been unable to tell, one in which English paninsular dominion becomes a troubled assumption rather than a foregone conclusion."[14] The boy in particular, who dies rather than become assimilated, represents "an adjacent world that cannot be annexed ... an otherness that will perish to endure".[28]
Green children of Woolpit
Yes i am using wikipedia and in contrast to what people seem to think its not a bad source.
Actually, Wikipedia's bad days (being not as reliable as it is now) have been over for some years.
|
|
|
Post by clusium on Sept 29, 2017 16:09:08 GMT
was that an urban legend or is their a basis at all?. One theory that I've read, is that those 2 children may have been the children from The Babes in the Woods. The theory was that they didn't die out in the forest, like the poem said, but, were found completely sick by the people of Woolpit, & then years later, after the brother had died, & the girl had learned to speak, she told them that story. I can't remember where I read that from.
|
|
|
Post by MCDemuth on Nov 18, 2019 23:47:11 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Feologild Oakes on Nov 19, 2019 0:43:35 GMT
|
|
|
Post by theauxphou on Nov 19, 2019 9:22:36 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Feologild Oakes on Nov 19, 2019 9:43:41 GMT
Yes he did, i did not notice that when i watched it yesterday. But i would assume that it was just a slip of the tongue from his part.
|
|
|
Post by hi224 on Nov 19, 2019 9:50:26 GMT
Yes he did, i did not notice that when i watched it yesterday. But i would assume that it was just a slip of the tongue from his part. wow two years later still strong.
|
|