william iron arm

william iron arm

born:
died: 1046
father: tancred d'hauteville [1]

william and drogo seem to have probably really been brothers. they were present in italy by 1035 at the latest. the legend is that he killed the emir of sicily with his bare arm. he was elected count of the normans in apulia, and successfully defended the province from an attempted byzantine reconquest, but died shortly afterwards. also lord of ascoli.

[1]: the deeds of count roger of calabria & sicily & of duke robert guiscard his brother , book I

http://dghjdfsghkrdghdgja.appspot.com/categories/gen/lines/hauteville/williamironarm.html

ok, so step one is to relisten to things closely. a lot of what i just uploaded was raw, and i may reupload. i won’t repost. i should be back to reposting deny everything material within about a week.

my goal was to be done remastering by jan 1. that was a full month with no headphones, so i'm going to need to work a little faster through it.

i have a rough outline of things. i'll be constructing several new releases to hold outtakes and alternate mixes. so there's a LOT coming...

...and then there's going to be a lot of new material coming, as i complete roughly 5 projects quite quickly.

found the contradiction i was looking for. it's kind of nasty.

in 1058, pope nicholas II started to more vigorously enforce rules against incest. the duke of apulia at the time, a norman landholder, was forced to divorce and remarry. this indicates that the duke of apulia (robert guiscard) must have been related to the ducal line of normandy, as the confused mythical history states.

robert guiscard took over control of sicily in an unclear way. either circumstance was remarkably fortuitous, or the history that exists is essentially a lie to justify his seizure of control, with the backing of the church. it is said he was the brother of the ruler he seized power from, putting him next in the line of succession. ok, let's accept that supposedly historical statement at face value.

it would then follow that robert guiscard was also the brother of a geoffrey, who had a son that entered the clergy and married into the norman aristocracy. oops.

first, note that the clergy were, at this point, permitted to marry. laws against priests marrying are actually fairly recent (and the reformists rejected them for that reason). so, there's nothing weird about a priest marrying. but, how do we explain a priest marrying into his own family, breaking the rules that the church were then recently so keen to enforce? how do we accept that the church forced the powerful duke to divorce and yet permitted his priestly nephew to marry his own cousin?

the solution is that geoffrey did not marry his cousin at all. to be clear, i'm not suggesting a reason to think that marriage that is recorded didn't happen. rather, the marriage was not one between cousins because geoffrey and robert guiscard were not actually brothers.

it is the sons of tancred from his first wife that comprise the likely historical fiction, as it was concocted by guiscard to justify his seizure of power after the death (and possible poisoning) of humphrey. so says my hypothesis, anyways.

but the contradiction that has been found does expose the lie and it can no longer be responsibly upheld.

i have conquered all of the mortals.

the only thing left for me to pwn is time.

"Today, Fighting Island is privately owned by BASF Corporation. "

that's a thing that happens?

it's ok, though. basf, which was created out of the decartelization of ig farben, which was the neural center of the nazi state and was never actually run through a "denazification process", which has led to many decades of reminders that they were once the neural center of the nazi state, are fully engaged in the process of reversing the effects of fordism in the region. don't feel bad, that one went over my head, too. http://riccawu.mnsi.net/story9.html