|
Post by herosrest on Dec 13, 2023 7:00:15 GMT -6
Because the nature of tribal record which has filtered to us across time is entirely fickle and family specific, I looked at it as a woodpecker enjoys lunch because it is fickle and minutely specifuc in almost all iccerences. There was no written tradition and art decorated clothing and tipi hides. Without offering offence since utterly none is intended, literati make both too much and little of it. The tribes did not have paper and drew in the dirt until the Carlisle generation matured and how many continued the traditions? Youth doesn't until its generation matures and John Stands in Timber is exemplar. He knew all the surviving Cheyenne battle survivors around Crow, Cheyenne and Sioux agencies as they mingled. He knew Marquis who photographed him with family in 1926. Marquis may have delivered his child. Did he not tell Marquis about the Willy Bends and the lower fords? No. That is quite something since for example, Tall Bull was advising Marquis on what and how it went down. To me this speaks for itself and detracts hugely from the important work Donahue did and does. He did not research his research.
Now, one of the Arikara scouts was known by telling his story. It was passed on by his son in later years and record of both versions shows them remarkably similar across decades. There is little confusion but obviously it tells that scouts story and not that of round consideration made by researchers. They told their story because that was all there was and it was how you got laid and held respect to set example - this is and was how life IS. Tribal life was not innovative or remarkable. Had European settlement failed then life now would be as it was 500 years ago. From what I understand there would be no horses on the continent and that is intriguing. No nomads.
|
|
|
Post by shan on Dec 13, 2023 11:01:51 GMT -6
Noggy
I take your point about the Red Horse drawings, and we could probably come up with a few more instances from others as well. In fact those drawings which show the warriors who were killed at LBH by him and others are a case in point.
Those men, and indeed most of the others who were shown fighting that day are shown as they would have liked to have been seen had they had the time to prepare, for due to the surprise attack, very few had the time to get dressed and painted as they would have wished. Given that, the artists have used artistic license to depict them as they'd have liked to be seen. And there's another element to this. They had a belief that should the worst happen and they ended up getting killed, then it was very impotant to them that passed over to the other side in their best clothing.
No, I was thinking more of the numous other drawings concerning inter tribal warfare, and indeed some of the early fights with the army and settlers. What we see in those drawing is a scrupuloue attention to detail, detail not only about the way that the artist was dressed and painted, but the color of their horse and the weapons they were using. But more than that, they often showed their enemies in great detail as well, so much so, I suspect most of their fellow tribesmen would have recognised them had they ever seen those drawings.
It was the same when it came to depicting white men. For there are a number of drawings in which we see them wearing differnt kinds of beards and hair styles, plus, differing kinds of clothing and weapons as well, more especially amongst the settlers.
I suppose what I'm trying to say that they didn't have to go into that kind of detail, but it looks to me as if they simply couldn't help it.
Shan
|
|
|
Post by noggy on Dec 14, 2023 4:02:26 GMT -6
Noggy I take your point about the Red Horse drawings, and we could probably come up with a few more instances from others as well. In fact those drawings which show the warriors who were killed at LBH by him and others are a case in point. Those men, and indeed most of the others who were shown fighting that day are shown as they would have liked to have been seen had they had the time to prepare, for due to the surprise attack, very few had the time to get dressed and painted as they would have wished. Given that, the artists have used artistic license to depict them as they'd have liked to be seen. And there's another element to this. They had a belief that should the worst happen and they ended up getting killed, then it was very impotant to them that passed over to the other side in their best clothing. No, I was thinking more of the numous other drawings concerning inter tribal warfare, and indeed some of the early fights with the army and settlers. What we see in those drawing is a scrupuloue attention to detail, detail not only about the way that the artist was dressed and painted, but the color of their horse and the weapons they were using. But more than that, they often showed their enemies in great detail as well, so much so, I suspect most of their fellow tribesmen would have recognised them had they ever seen those drawings. It was the same when it came to depicting white men. For there are a number of drawings in which we see them wearing differnt kinds of beards and hair styles, plus, differing kinds of clothing and weapons as well, more especially amongst the settlers. I suppose what I'm trying to say that they didn't have to go into that kind of detail, but it looks to me as if they simply couldn't help it. Shan I totally agree, and your point was taken. NA drawings are marvelous pieces of history, and art. My academic field is history, which I have a degree in, and one of my pet peeves (correctly spelled?) is what i guess you would call source criticism. (Imo it is more important than ever, with "news", "facts" etc are poured out from the weirdest of people on the internet, and I seriously think critical thinking and such should be taught at school today). I look at testimonies from both NAs and whites with the same scrutiny, and while i think both parts could lie or remember wrong, I really think this ledgers for the most parts are genuine depictions. Maybe a flaw here or there, or something cultural I don't catch, but still. And that gives them huge historical value. Plus they are often pretty cool. It struck me now that I have not thought over the same way about what people in my neck of the woods and Northern Europe in general made. The Bayeux tapestry, for instance. There is a huge difference, with the NA drawings being individual pieces of art, and I guess much of works like the tapestry in and so on in Europe were made on the order of a king or another person who had an agenda, increasing the odds of it being more propaganda than a true depiction, but still...Okay, no my mind starts going off again, time to close it down again (Sorry, Woddy!) All the best, Noggy
|
|
|
Post by shan on Dec 14, 2023 11:25:02 GMT -6
Noddy,
I think your reference to the Bayeux tapestry is interesting. Yes,it was almost certainly made on the orders of the King and his advisors, and so I think we can take it that it was meant to be seen as a piece of propogander rather than a work which was concerned with accuracy. But still, that being said, I think much of what we see is as accurate as folk memory allowed. The scene with the figure who is supposed to be Harold being hit in the eye by an arrow may have some basis in truth, in other words, it could be based on eye witness testimony, although I think I resd elsewhere that he was more likely felled with a sword.
But thenfor those who care to look a little more closely, there are some interesting goings on in what is called the marginalia ~ the areas above and below the main action. Unfortunately we'll never know what they are referring to, my guess is that its the artist having fun at some ones expense by the look of it.
Shan
|
|
|
Post by noggy on Dec 15, 2023 2:08:21 GMT -6
Noddy, I think your reference to the Bayeux tapestry is interesting. Yes,it was almost certainly made on the orders of the King and his advisors, and so I think we can take it that it was meant to be seen as a piece of propogander rather than a work which was concerned with accuracy. But still, that being said, I think much of what we see is as accurate as folk memory allowed. The scene with the figure who is supposed to be Harold being hit in the eye by an arrow may have some basis in truth, in other words, it could be based on eye witness testimony, although I think I resd elsewhere that he was more likely felled with a sword. But thenfor those who care to look a little more closely, there are some interesting goings on in what is called the marginalia ~ the areas above and below the main action. Unfortunately we'll never know what they are referring to, my guess is that its the artist having fun at some ones expense by the look of it. Shan At the same time, if we look at this scene through the lenses of that time: Wouldn't a more "glorious" way to present how he was killed have been in more honest combat, for instance a 1 vs 1 duel, rather than killing him from distance? But yes, I think more of the armor, depictions of transport etc are what gives the most interesting insight into warfare in Middle Age. You also have Roman statues etc, who really don't hold back; they celebrate what we today would call war crimes and try to cover over, while they merrily depicted executions of prisoners. But it is not always possible to philter out honesty from propaganda, facts from honest mistakes, when dealing with old sources. Humor is something which is hard to discover, and it is timeless, so it can always be a factor. I think it was during Crazy Horse's surrender that many warriors are said to have given their captors phony names, just like one can imagine a person doing today.(People up to this day have tried translating the so-called "Voynich manuscript", which is written in a strange language sometime around the 15th century. Like a friend of mine said, why wasn't this just a joke by some educated guys who knew it could drive people crazy for years after their passing?) All the best, Noggy
|
|
|
Post by herosrest on Dec 15, 2023 7:42:19 GMT -6
Since the Norman Conquest has dropped in to discussion, I thought i'd share a little local history. I believe that one of Harold's Standard bearer's was Ansgar. That would be him stood in the image where Harold's Draco is shown in tapestry scenes. Asgar etc..The land around my Northolt home was Ansgar's realm - he held land across the south. His defence of London at Southwark forced Norman cavalry to march upriver searching another crossing. That is at Brentford with Northolt five miles north. East immediately are Horsenden Hills where Saxon Army's ranged and martialled their pony herds in times of war. Ansgar's estate passed to the Mandevilles, William the Barstard's right hand man who also assumed a large part in the future of Scotland. One day yet, we will kick the Norman's out and take back our Country. Damn Vikings..... Ansgar the Staller
|
|
|
Post by herosrest on Dec 15, 2023 7:55:02 GMT -6
Some views of modern Northolt link which really are worth seeing. The hills were constructed with the rubble removed from the old Wembley Stadium. Of course Northolt Airbase is only a few miles west along the A40 and the Air Defence batteries in place on the hills now command the entire London Airspace from the bunkers deep below and those under the A40 opposite Marnam Fields where the bombs dropped on Germany were stored before going to the Racecourse. Do watch the video. Btitain at its something or other.
|
|