1066: does the date still matter?

1066 was once regarded as the date everyone knew. It remains widely known among the large numbers of the general public with an interest in history. This article suggests that popular perceptions of 1066 are a range of at times confused memories and that so-called academic history has in the last fi...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Publicado en:Historical Research Vol. 78; no. 202; pp. 443 - 465
Autor principal: Bates, David
Formato: Artículo
Publicado: Oxford University Press / USA Nov2005
Materias:
Acceso en línea:Ver este registro en EBSCOhost
fields @attributes:
  recordID: 1
pdfLink:
plink: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=hlh&AN=18657236&site=ehost-live
header:
  @attributes:
    shortDbName: hlh
    uiTerm: 18657236
    longDbName: Humanities International Complete
    uiTag: AN
  controlInfo:
    bkinfo:
    jinfo:
      jid:
        09503471
        7QY
      jtl: Historical Research
      issn: 09503471
      maglogo: N
    pubinfo:
      dt: Nov2005
      vid: 78
      iid: 202
      pid: 622
      pub: Oxford University Press / USA
    artinfo:
      ui:
        18657236
        10.1111/j.1468-2281.2005.00355.x
      ppf: 443
      ppct: 22
      formats:
        fmt:
          – @attributes:
              type: T
          – @attributes:
              type: P
              size: 129KB
      tig:
        atl: 1066: does the date still matter?
      aug:
        au: Bates, David
        affil: Institute of Historical Research, University of London
      su:
        Historians
        Scholars
        Multiculturalism
        Social policy
        Social history
        History
      sug:
        subj:
          Historians
          Scholars
          Multiculturalism
          Social policy
          Social history
          History
      ab: 1066 was once regarded as the date everyone knew. It remains widely known among the large numbers of the general public with an interest in history. This article suggests that popular perceptions of 1066 are a range of at times confused memories and that so-called academic history has in the last fifty years had little impact on them. It acknowledges that revolutionary changes in contemporary historians’ approaches to the past have made 1066 less significant as a date, yet argues that the date's very popularity with the general public and the centrality of change to historical analysis makes a clear perception and extensive dissemination crucial. It suggests that 1066 was ultimately an act of legitimated and purposefully directed violence and needs to be discussed as such. It is necessary to guard against automatically associating every change in the decades after 1066 with the impact of the Conquest and to see them instead as often being aspects of wider processes. It is also crucial to see 1066 as an event of European significance and to set it within the multicultural history of the British Isles. It had consequences which fundamentally shaped English and British history. Perhaps surprisingly, new information and new interpretations of long familiar sources are possible.
      pubtype: Academic Journal
      doctype: Article
      src: R
    language: English
    refInfo:
    copyright:
      @attributes:
        flag: Y
      custom: © 2020 Institute of Historical Research.
      item: Historical Research
      holder: Oxford University Press / USA
      dt:
        @attributes:
          year: 2005
    holdings:
      @attributes:
        islocal: N