PDA

View Full Version : Knight's skeleton reveals brutal life and death


Play The Man
07-01-2009, 01:48 AM
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/politics/scotland/5687262/Skeleton-reveals-violent-life-and-death-of-medieval-knight.html

A 620-year-old skeleton discovered under the floor of Stirling Castle has shed new light on the violent life of a medieval knight.

Archaeologists believe that bones found in an ancient chapel on the site are those of an English knight named Robert Morley who died in a tournament there in 1388.

Radio carbon dating has confirmed that the skeleton is from that period, and detailed analysis suggests that he was in his mid-20s, was heavily muscled and had suffered several serious wounds in earlier contests.

He appears to have survived for some time with a large arrowhead lodged in his chest, while the re-growth of bone around a dent in the front of his skull indicates that he had also recovered from a severe blow from an axe.

He eventually died when he was struck by a sword that sliced through his nose and jaw. His reconstructed skull also indicates that he was lying on the ground when the fatal blow was delivered.

However, it was only recently re-examined following advances in laser scanning techniques that not only revealed the nature of the three wounds, but also showed that the knight had lost teeth, probably from another blow or from falling from his horse.

And you thought mixed martial artists have a brutal life? :punch:

Tyburn
07-05-2009, 05:11 PM
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/politics/scotland/5687262/Skeleton-reveals-violent-life-and-death-of-medieval-knight.html







And you thought mixed martial artists have a brutal life? :punch:

Jousting Competition.

He would have been knocked off his horse first and then the battle would have continued much like a duel...if he was knocked violently enough to bust his teeth, likelyhood is he never got to his feet before the other fighter killed him

Jousts were great fun to watch, not all of them were to the death I dont think...the closest England ever got to Gladiatorial Games.

Rome went much further, they would stage historic Battle in a huge arena...they would even flood the floor to create sea battles! Rome would always play the part of the winner...and whoever was a prisoner would play the part of the loser on big games like that.

He must have been someone quite important though to be burried within a Castle

He's also Scotish! and at that time...he might have been prior to English rule in Scotland...he may have fought for the King of Scotland!!

Chuck
07-05-2009, 08:35 PM
Jousting Competition.

He would have been knocked off his horse first and then the battle would have continued much like a duel...if he was knocked violently enough to bust his teeth, likelyhood is he never got to his feet before the other fighter killed him

Jousts were great fun to watch, not all of them were to the death I dont think...the closest England ever got to Gladiatorial Games.

Rome went much further, they would stage historic Battle in a huge arena...they would even flood the floor to create sea battles! Rome would always play the part of the winner...and whoever was a prisoner would play the part of the loser on big games like that.

He must have been someone quite important though to be burried within a Castle

He's also Scotish! and at that time...he might have been prior to English rule in Scotland...he may have fought for the King of Scotland!!

You saw Gladiator too?????

I love that movie!!!! :D

Tyburn
07-05-2009, 10:41 PM
You saw Gladiator too?????

I love that movie!!!! :D
:blink: Gladiator didnt show the Colloseum being flooded, or a staged Naval Battle....it didnt show no jousting neither :mellow:



















yes I watched Gladiator :happydancing:

Crisco
07-06-2009, 06:31 PM
Jousting was very rarely if ever to the death. I don't believe the option for execution was ever even given. All the competitors where of noble birth.

The touraments staged by the crowns of Europe and the games staged by Rome have few things in common.


Roughly 85-90% of Roman games simply ended in surrender. Very few led to death. Gladiators where expensive and took years to train properaly.

There have been studies that showed many gladiators lived better lives then your average citizen and where trained quite well and cared for medically.

Medieval jousts where essentially noble pissing contests with spectators.

The games where a violent spectacle purely for entertainment which many emperors used to control the populace by feeding them and giving them sport.
The latin: "MOBILE VVLGVS" meaning moveable public.

Tyburn
07-06-2009, 06:49 PM
Jousting was very rarely if ever to the death. I don't believe the option for execution was ever even given. All the competitors where of noble birth.

The touraments staged by the crowns of Europe and the games staged by Rome have few things in common.


Roughly 85-90% of Roman games simply ended in surrender. Very few led to death. Gladiators where expensive and took years to train properaly.

There have been studies that showed many gladiators lived better lives then your average citizen and where trained quite well and cared for medically.

Medieval jousts where essentially noble pissing contests with spectators.

The games where a violent spectacle purely for entertainment which many emperors used to control the populace by feeding them and giving them sport.
The latin: "MOBILE VVLGVS" meaning moveable public.

Jousts were occasionally used like a duel I believe. Normally for sport...certainly not as execution though.

The connection between Rome and Jousts is only...that they were both sorta violent sports for entertainment :)