The son of legendary English king, William the Conqueror, William II is one of the lesser-studied English monarchs. Despite this, his thirteen-year reign included some key events, as well as one of the most highly debated monarchical deaths in English history. Read on to find out more about this largely underappreciated King of England.   William II’s Early Life William II of England (top right corner), from Historia Anglorum, by Matthew Paris, c. 1253, accessed via British Library   William was born somewhere between 1157 and 1160—his exact date of birth is unfortunately unknown. His father was William I of England (better known as William the Conqueror), and he was not actually the oldest of his children.   William was the third of four sons born to William I and his wife, Matilda of Flanders. His eldest brother, Robert, inherited his father’s position as Duke of Normandy, and was an unsuccessful claimant to the throne of England. The second-eldest son was Richard, who died while hunting in the New Forest around 1075. William also had a younger brother, Henry, who himself would go on to become king as well as five or six sisters.   William was also well-known for his nickname, “William Rufus.” The word Rufus comes from the Latin translation of the word red, which was either a reference to his allegedly ruddy complexion, or the red hair he had as a child. Either way, this nickname stuck for life.   Accession to the Throne William the Conqueror, from the Bayeux Tapestry, c. 1070s, via Wikimedia Commons   Robert, William’s eldest brother, rebelled against William I and attempted to take England. William, alongside his youngest brother Henry, sided with their father, and fought valiantly beside him, ending Robert’s rebellion. It was for this act of valor that William was reputedly his father’s favorite son.   William I died on September 9, 1087, while on campaign in France, and in his will he left Normandy to Robert, a large sum of money to Henry, and England to William Rufus. On September 26 of the same year, William’s coronation was held, and he was duly crowned King William II of England.   William’s Relations With France Robert II at the Siege of Antioch, by J.J. Dassy, 1850, via Wikimedia Commons   One problem that William faced in his reign was the same that had also plagued his father—his kingdom was split in two. Naturally, being a Norman, William owned land in Normandy as well. William’s brother Robert ruled in Normandy and William ruled in England—although technically he owned the land in Normandy as well, despite Robert ruling in his name.   Some nobles who held land in both England and Normandy often ran the risk of displeasing one of either William or Robert at the expense of pleasing the other. A group of nobles saw that the only way they could possibly rectify the situation was to unite England and Normandy under one ruler.   They banded together in Normandy, to revolt against William in favor of Robert in what came to be known as the Rebellion of 1088. However, Robert failed to appear in England. William capitalized on this, and won over supporters with money and promises of a better government. Supporters flocked to his side, and helped him to defeat the rebellion. In turn, this secured his superiority. In 1091, William visited Normandy and crushed Robert’s forces for good, before reconciling with him on good terms.   The two brothers, now on good terms, agreed to campaign together to take land in Maine that their youngest brother, Henry, had taken. After a siege that lasted fifteen days, the land was back in Robert’s hands and Henry was defeated.   William Rufus and Scotland Malcolm III of Scotland, c. 18th century, via Royal Collection Trust   Like with many English kings from the Middle Ages, conflicts happened on two fronts—France, and of course, Scotland. Not unusually for a medieval English king, William faced hostility from Scotland for the majority of his reign.   In 1091, King Malcolm III of Scotland attempted to invade England, which William fought off successfully, eventually forcing Malcolm to pay him homage. To strengthen England’s northern defenses, William built Carlisle Castle. The building of this castle also helped him to take land in Cumberland and Westmorland, which had previously been controlled by the Scots.   Naturally, Malcolm was not happy about this, and the two kings clashed once more, which resulted in Malcolm attempting another invasion of England. This time, it resulted in the Battle of Alnwick on 13 November 1093.   The result of the Battle of Alnwick was a decisive victory for the English forces. During the battle, Malcolm III was ambushed by English soldiers, led by Robert de Mowbray. Malcolm, alongside his son Edward, was killed.   Malcolm’s Cross, marking the spot where he died, erected in 1774, via Wikimedia Commons   This victory was good news for William as it threw the Scottish succession into disarray—and William did what he could to make sure that it stayed that way as long as possible. Following the death of the Scottish king and his son, Malcolm’s brother Donald seized the throne, and was crowned as King Donald III of Scotland. Naturally, William supported Donald’s rival claimant to the throne—who was another son of Malcolm III’s, called Duncan. Duncan was briefly crowned as King Duncan II of Scotland, before Donald took the crown back from him.   William II then turned to another of Malcolm III’s sons, Edgar, and supported him in his claim for the crown. Finally, in 1097, Edgar claimed the crown for himself, being crowned King Edgar of Scotland. Because of the support that William had shown him over the years that his uncle Donald was king, Edgar respected William, recognizing his authority over Lothian, and attended William II’s court.   This example of William’s interference in Scotland shows how much of a clever diplomat he was. When it comes to Anglo-Scottish conflict, particularly in the Middle Ages, our thoughts are often drawn straight to the Edwardian period—to Edward I, the “Hammer of the Scots,” or Edward II’s disastrous defeat at Bannockburn, or even Edward III’s victories at Dupplin Moor and Neville’s Cross. However, very few of those aforementioned kings had the diplomatic skills that William Rufus did—proving that he really is one of the most underappreciated kings in English history.   William II’s Relationship With the Church Pope Urban II at Clermont, 14th century, via Wikimedia Commons   As with many English monarchs, William II had his struggles with the Church. It was unusual for the time for the king to not be wholly devoted to the Church, especially as William was a younger son, it was almost expected of him that he should be devoted to the Church. However, it was not just William who did not like the Church—the Church did not like William Rufus either.   William had a habit of keeping bishop’s positions empty for prolonged periods of time, much to the annoyance of the Church, who viewed it as William’s way of openly admitting that he couldn’t care less about the Church. A notable example of William II’s fractured relationship with the Church comes from the following anecdote. Anselm, the Archbishop of Canterbury, was so aggrieved at William’s rule that he fled England into exile, going straight to Pope Urban II to seek his help and advice on how to deal with the King.   Pope Urban II did in fact intervene and negotiate with William, and the issue was eventually resolved. However, William was never one to let an opportunity slip away. Anselm remained in exile until the end of William’s reign in 1100, but William had already seized the opportunity in the absence of the Archbishop of Canterbury.   Because Anselm was self-exiled, this left the revenues of the Archbishop of Canterbury vacant, meaning that William was able to claim these funds until Anselm returned—which was the end of William’s reign, upon his death. William essentially had free money coming into the crown from the vacant Archbishop of Canterbury’s seat for three years of his reign!   William II’s Personal Life William II’s death,from Grande Chroniques de France, c. 13th century, via British Library   Another reason that the Church was not fond of William was the rumor that he was homosexual. He never married nor had children (even illegitimate ones), and male fashion during William’s reign became much more flamboyant and effeminate, which greatly disgusted traditional churchmen.   Some contemporaries as well as modern historians have swallowed the rumors that he was homosexual, as there is no evidence of his being infertile or impotent. There were also rumors that Ranulf Flambard, one of William II’s closest friends and advisors, was William’s sexual partner. He was appointed Bishop of Durham in 1099, much to the Church’s displeasure. Despite these stories, there is no solid evidence as to whether or not William or Ranulf was in fact homosexual.   Death and Legacy of William II William’s death, by James William Edmund Doyle, from A Chronicle of England, 1864, via Wikimedia Commons   One of the events that William II is most well-known for is sadly his death. On 2 August 1100, William and his brother Henry, among others, went on a hunting trip into the New Forest. At some point during the trip, an arrow pierced William’s chest and penetrated his lung. He died shortly afterward.   Naturally, his death was described as a “hunting accident,” although numerous theories as to who killed him have been around almost since the day that he was killed. Perhaps the most famous is that it was an assassination plot set up by his brother Henry, who raced back to London to claim the crown for himself before anyone else could.   Another is that the murderer was a man called Walter Tirel. One story goes that William had shot a stag, and another stag ran in front of William and his targeted stag. Tirel fired an arrow, which missed the second stag and instead hit William, in a freak accident. Tirel fled to France following William’s death, which many people viewed as an admission of guilt, despite the fact that hunting accidents occurred regularly and were often fatal in the Middle Ages.   Whatever happened to William II will likely never be discovered, but as a king and ruler he left behind a legacy of an underrated and largely underappreciated king. A king who strengthened borders on the north of the country, and built castles which still stand today, almost one thousand years later.

The United States Secret Service’s (USSS) acting director has said that the local police in Pennsylvania had warned them about a man on the roof before Donald Trump’s assassination attempt, but the message did not reach USSS agents on time.

Thanks to open borders and criminals pouring into the city, drug overdoses in New York are on the rise. More than 3,000 deaths were reported last year alone, with 89% of them linked to the synthetic drug fentanyl. Now, we have a new ultra-deadly synthetic drug that’s hitting the streets: carfentanil. Carfentanil is a synthetic […] The post China Drug Carfentanil Hits NYC: 100X Worse Than Fentanyl appeared first on www.independentsentinel.com.

Have you ever been minding your own business and suddenly stopped in your tracks by the sound of beautiful music? Hearing someone play an instrument with heart and passion is good for the soul. Archie Gould is a painter by trade, but when he saw a lonely piano at a worksite, he knew exactly what to do. A coworker caught a video of Archie tickling the ivories on a baby grand, and the sounds are simply incredible. Archie’s coworker originally posted the video to their Instagram, @mudbug07_amr, to share his talent. They were working at the Stanley Milner Library in Edmonton, Alberta when he sat down and began to play Lou Ni’s arrangement of Bach’s Prelude No. 2 in G Minor. He had no sheet music, no help, just raw talent. View this post on Instagram A post shared by Dust-to-Digital (@dusttodigital) Archie Didn’t Look Like a Concert Pianist That Day He was dressed for work on a construction site, not a concert hall, but that didn’t matter. His ability to play beautiful music had nothing to do with his clothing. The video was shared by @duesttodigital on Instagram where it quickly went viral. People loved Archie’s music. One person wrote, “My wish for the player…may you always have a piano available when you want, and may you always leave work safely with no injuries to your hands, fingers, arms or anywhere else on your body or in your mind. Thank you for sharing your passion and hard work for all those years at the keys. Hearing your performance today was a joy.” “I love when musicians just bust it out! What a treat for the guy in the beanie playing it cool in the background,” this person agreed. One supporter reminded us that looks can be deceiving and Archie is a perfect example and there are plenty of people just like him. “I work plumbing and remodeling homes and am also a classically trained cellist and composer. Never judge a book by its cover.” You can find the source of this story’s featured image here. The post Canadian Painter Finds Fame After A Video Of Him Playing Piano On His Lunch Break Goes Viral appeared first on InspireMore.

Renowned Pollster Says Donald Trump Can End Kamala’s Campaign With One ‘Ten-Word Question’

Do you remember the summer of 1979? For some, it may seem like another lifetime. It pretty much was. I graduated high school in June 1979, so for me, that summer was filled with questions about where life was headed. But you never forget the songs from summers like that, and this article takes a look at 10 songs that we think will bring you back to the last summer of the ’70s. It was an interesting one for so many reasons. Starting out in June, McDonald’s introduced the Happy Meal. That’s something you probably never would have remembered. Also The post 10 Songs To Bring You Back To The Summer Of 1979 appeared first on ClassicRockHistory.com.

If you're tired of censorship and dystopian threats against civil liberties, subscribe to Reclaim The Net. The more things change, the more they remain the same, at least in the UK; after many years of Tory governments’ vigorous efforts to extend mass surveillance indiscriminately targeting citizens and enact stringent anti-free speech laws, the new Labour government seems to be picking up right where the previous one left off. The wake of the Southport riots has elicited the usual medley of reactions: moves to address societal issues with more surveillance, strengthen the police state, blame “misinformation” and unproven, but always handy to bring up, “foreign meddling.” But the real malady seems to be squarely at home: in fact, in the prime minister’s office. Keir Starmer happens to be sitting there now, but the policy hardly ever changes: he, too, wants more mass surveillance based on facial recognition, and more pressure on social media to ramp up censorship. If anything does change it is the intensity of these demands that have long since been rejected as “Orwellian” by rights groups like Big Brother Watch. Here, Starmer told a news conference called after the events branded as far-right riots, that participants in the protests (whom he called “thugs” and compared with football hooligans) are “mobile” and for that reason, police forces will, going forward, be a part of a network of sorts. The prime minister added that there will be intelligence and data sharing, as well as “wider deployment of facial recognition technology, and preventative action, criminal behavior orders to restrict their movements before they can even board a train, in just the same way that we do with football hooligans.” Movement restrictions are said to apply only to those with previous convictions, and those who have committed “violence at protests.” But here things get complicated because even those who were charged with relatively minor offenses like disorderly conduct could end up having their movements surveilled and restricted. Starmer isn’t in favor of enacting new laws; he seems satisfied that all this can be achieved within the existing legislation and announced a “coordinated response” within the police across the country and law enforcement taking advantage of those laws more than before. But he does want more police officers, and it seems that increasing their numbers will be one election campaign promise that will be kept. Starmer is announcing these measures as a way to deal not with protests – he insists this is about “violent disorder.” And, he blames online platforms for being the places where that is being “whipped up.” Meaning, that when the authorities decide some online speech can be considered as incitement to violence, that is, in Starmer’s words, “not a matter of free speech. It is a criminal offense.” But what will the authorities consider incitement to violence? This is particularly important since a number of lawmakers – such as Labour MP Patrick Hurley, Former MI6 chief Richard Dearlove, and former Security Minister Stephen McPartland – blamed “misinformation” and “disinformation” as well as “speculation” regarding the identity of the Southport stabbing attacker. Therefore if speculation can be considered misinformation, and misinformation incitement to violence – this opens the door wide to censor views expressed online that basically ask questions about something – i.e., “speculate”. Regarding online platforms, the prime minister suggested that his approach to the police during a meeting that preceded the news conference (namely, “get the relevant people around the table, and fix the problems and meet the challenges that we have as a country”) will apply to internet platforms as well. It remains to be seen what “work(ing) together to address the challenges” will look like once Starmer gets online platforms and government representatives at the same table. Meanwhile, the idea of ushering in even more facial recognition-based mass surveillance is seen as terrible by groups like Big Brother Watch, who have campaigned for years against this type of policing. The group’s director, Silkie Carlo, said in a statement that the pledge regarding facial recognition as response to public disorder was “alarming.” According to her, democracy is threatened, not protected with this approach, while the type of mass surveillance pushed by Starmer (and previous governments) “turns members of the public into walking ID cards.” Carlo made a point of the live facial recognition technology being “dangerously inaccurate,” “common” in Russia and China, supported by no clear legal basis in the UK, and, banned elsewhere in Europe In her opinion, Starmer did not address the causes of the Southport attack (when three girls were murdered), or the reasons for what Carlo calls “violent, racist thuggery” that followed. Instead, the prime minister promised more AI surveillance. And that, according to Carlo, is “tone deaf in these circumstances.” “(It) will give the public absolutely no confidence that this government has the competence or conviction to get tough on the causes of these crimes and protect the public,” she concluded. If you're tired of censorship and dystopian threats against civil liberties, subscribe to Reclaim The Net. The post UK PM Keir Starmer Uses Riots To Call For Mass Surveillance and Social Media Censorship appeared first on Reclaim The Net.

More Than Half Say the First Amendment 'Goes Too Far'