Articles

Agincourt: Myth and Reality 1415-2015, Stephen Cooper

Agincourt: Myth and Reality 1415-2015, Stephen Cooper

Agincourt: Myth and Reality 1415-2015, Stephen Cooper

Agincourt: Myth and Reality 1415-2015, Stephen Cooper

In some respects this feels like the published results of a research conference, except that here all of the articles are by the same person. Each chapter looks at a particular aspect of the battle, from its location to its historical reputation. The book is thus organised by topic rather than chronologically, and doesn't include a narrative account of the battle. The nearest to that comes in the section on Tactics, but even here the focus is on individual questions - how were the English archers arranged, what formation did the French cavalry use? The lack of a narrative account of the battle does mean that the reader either needs to be familiar with the battle, or have a more traditional account to hand.

I found it refreshing to find a book of this nature that doesn't automatically follow the most radical line on each issue - this starts with the section on the location, where the author concludes that the evidence for the traditional location is stronger than the evidence for any alternatives. This makes the author's views elsewhere all the more credible. Perhaps the only false step is a conclusion comparing Agincourt and Bannockburn, written before the Scottish 'no' vote and thus demonstrating the perils of making a topical comment in a work of history.

This book covers a wide range of interesting topics, and the author comes to convincing conclusions on each of the key topics. The section on the historical reputation of the battle in England, Britain and France is of great interest, as it the chapter on the important role of London in the English war effort. Overall this is a useful addition to the literature on this well studied battle.

Chapters
1 - Location
2 - English Victory or French Defeat?
3 - The General and the Army
4 - Casualties and Survivors
5 - Who Started It?
6 - Kingdom and Capital
7 - Strategy, Tactics and Morale
8 - The Memory of Agincourt
9 - A Decisive Battle?
10 - History, Legend and Myth
Conclusion: From Bannockburn to Agincourt, 2014-2015

Author: Stephen Cooper
Edition: Hardcover
Pages: 256
Publisher: Pen & Sword Military
Year: 2014



Portchester Castle, Hampshire

The outer walls of Portchester Castle date from the late 3rd century, when the Roman province of Britannia came under attack from Saxon raiders.

The Romans responded by building several large forts along ‘the Saxon Shore’. A much smaller castle was built within the Roman walls in medieval times. The keep probably dates from the late 12th century, while the palace in the inner bailey was built in the late 1390s for Richard II (1377-99).

In the summer of 1415, Henry V stayed at Portchester Castle (amongst other places) while he mustered a force of around 12,000 men, and it was from there that he embarked for France. The anonymous author of the Gesta Henrici Quinti, who was probably a royal chaplain, tells us that Henry first learned of the notorious ‘Southampton Plot’ against his life and regime while he was staying at Portchester. He asked the three conspirators, the Earl of Cambridge, Henry, Lord Scrope and Sir Thomas Grey to attend a meeting in the castle, then had them arrested and imprisoned in a tower next to the Godshousegate in Southampton. They were tried and executed within a matter of days. Not long afterwards, the anonymous chaplain tells us that [The King] went down by barge from his castle of Porchester [sic] to the sea, going aboard his ship called le Trinite between the port of Southampton and Portsmouth. And at once he had the yard of her sail hoisted half-way up the mast to indicate his immediate readiness to sail and at the same time to serve as a signal to the ships of the fleet, which were dispersed in various places along the coast, to make haste to join him as soon as they could.


Agincourt: Myth and Reality 1415-2015, Stephen Cooper - History

Use spaces to separate tags. Use single quotes (') for phrases.

Overview

The overwhelming victory of Henry V's English army at Agincourt in October 1415 has passed into myth &ndash as one of the defining events of the Hundred Years War against France, as a feat of arms outshining the previous famous English victories at Crécy and Poitiers, and as a milestone in English medieval history. This epic story of how an exhausted, outnumbered army, commanded by an inspirational leader, crushed a huge French force on French soil has given rise to legends and misconceptions that make it difficult for us to reach a clear understanding of what really happened on the battlefield 600 years ago. But that is what Stephen Cooper attempts in this thoroughgoing, perceptive and fascinating reconstruction and reassessment of the battle and its history. In graphic detail he describes the battle itself and the military expedition that led to it. He examines the causes of the conflict and the controversies associated with it, and traces how the story of the battle has been told over the centuries, by eyewitnesses and chroniclers and by the historians of the present day.

As featured in the Yorkshire Post, The Star (Sheffield) and Rotherham Advertiser.

Due to changes in shipping and delivery caused by Brexit, there may be a short delay in shipping European orders while changes to our infrastructure are implemented. We appreciate your patience during this transition.


Bradmore is known to have practiced surgery along with other members of his family. His brother Nicholas Bradmore is also recorded as a surgeon in London, though John appears to have been the more successful of the two, amassing considerable property. John's daughter Agnes married another surgeon, John Longe. [1] Bradmore worked as a court physician throughout the reign of King Henry IV. [1]

According to historian Faye Getz, "Surgeons especially seem to have engaged in metalworking as a trade, probably making surgical instruments for themselves and for sale purposes." Bradmore was probably a skilled metalworker, as he is also referred to as a "gemestre" (gemster), which may mean he made jewellery. [2]

Before the Battle of Shrewsbury, Bradmore had been imprisoned on suspicion of using his metalworking skills for illegal purposes — namely counterfeiting coins. After the sixteen-year-old prince Henry had been shot in the face at Shrewsbury, he was released in order to aid him. [3]

Bradmore attended the prince at Kenilworth, where the wounded Henry had been taken after the battle. An arrow penetrated on the left side below the eye and beside the nose of the young prince. When surgeons tried to remove the arrow, the shaft broke, leaving the bodkin point embedded in his skull some five to six inches deep, narrowly missing the brain stem and surrounding arteries. Several other physicians had already been called on to resolve the problem, but were unable to help. Bradmore's successor as royal surgeon, Thomas Morstede, later called them "lewd chattering leeches". [4]

Bradmore instructed honey to be poured into the wound and invented an instrument to be used in the extraction. Two threaded tongs held a centre threaded shaft, which could be inserted into the wound: the shape was not unlike a tapered threaded rod inside a split cylinder. Once the end of the tongs located within the skirt of the arrowhead, the threaded rod was turned to open the tongs within the bodkin socket locking it into place and it, along with the device, could be extracted. The instrument was quickly made, either by Bradmore or by a blacksmith to Bradmore's specifications. Bradmore himself guided it into the wound to extract the arrowhead successfully. [3] The wound was then filled with alcohol (wine) to cleanse it.

For his service, he was paid an annuity of 10 sovereigns a year (approximately £26,720 in 2020). [ citation needed ] There are also records of payments to him for medicines for the king. In 1408, Bradmore was appointed Searcher of the Port of London. [5]

The Philomena, which documents the newly invented device and the surgery on the king, was written at some time between 1403 and Bradmore's death in 1412. It was published by Bradmore's son-in-law, John Longe. The original was written in Latin. It was translated into English in 1446. [5]

As an attendant to King Henry IV, Bradmore also oversaw the care of William Wyncelowe, the king's pavilioner, who had attempted suicide by stabbing himself in the abdomen. Wyncelowe had ruptured his intestines in the attempt. Bradmore attended him for 86 days, and Wyncelowe survived. [5]


Films/DVD’s

1944: The Final Defence
Director: Ake Lindman, Sakari Kirjavainen
(Metrodome)
Reviewed in Issue 3 of History of War

�: The Final Defence tells the story of the Battle of Tali-Ihantala, throwing you into the action from the very beginning. But it is repetitive, unfulfilling and not worth your money.”

Age of Uprising
Director: Arnaud des Pallieres
(Chelsea Films)
Reviewed in Issue 3 of History of War

“Judging from the cover, you’d think an epic battle is in store as two forces collide, but instead we get a slow, empty film that doesn’t really go anywhere. The film is a squandered opportunity.”

Assault on Normandy: Pointe Du Hoc
Director: Anthony Clayton
(Pen & Sword Military)
Reviewed in Issue 2 of History of War

Pointe Du Hoc recounts the operation to destroy the German gun battery during the D-Day Landings. It’s probably not a DVD you’ll watch often, but it offers an intriguing insight into one of the less well-known chapters of Operation Neptune.”

The Battle
Director: Rafa Lara
(Anchor Bay)
Reviewed in Issue 5 of History of War

“This Mexico-centric rendering of the story of the 1862 Battle of Puebla is the host nation’s biggest-budget film of all time. The tension leading up to the final, 30-minute battle is skillfully executed.”

D-Day: Breaching Enemy Lines
Dir: N/A
(History)
Reviewed in Issue 5 of History of War

“This is a smart-looking and neatly packaged 3-disc DVD box set, and manages to pack in just about everything that happened over that fateful period in history. But this US-produced documentary is predictably slanted towards the American version of events.”

The Empire’s Shield: The Royal Navy in the First World War
Director: N/A
(Strikeforce Entertainment)
Reviewed in Issue 5 of History of War

“At around two and a half hours long, this subject matter is as comprehensive as it is intriguing. This will have proper history nerds enthusiastically stroking their chins.”

Father of a Soldier/Tomorrow Was the War
Director: Rezo Chkheidze/Yuri Kara
(Ruscico)
Reviewed in Issue 3 of History of War

“These two Russian films look back at the Second World War from different moments in Soviet history. The former is a sentimental, revisonist melodrama while the latter is a coming-of-age tale.”

Fix Bayonets
Director: Jeremy Freeston
(Upfront)
Reviewed in Issue 3 of History of War

“This documentary focuses on two men who fought in the first major land battle of the Falklands War. Essentially a DVD version of a battleground visit, it provides a fascinating insight into the mindset of men who were sent off to fight in a place they had no connection with.”

Going Medieval: Get Hands On With a Thousand Years of History
Director: N/A
(History)
Reviewed in Issue 3 of History of War

“Fronted by historian and weapons expert Mike Loades, Going Medieval takes us back to the Middle Ages and is an intriguing journey into one of the country’s most challenging periods. It’ll make you wonder how our forefathers ever managed.”

The Great War
Director: N/A
(Eagle Media)
Reviewed in Issue 5 of History of War

“Whoever was responsible for sourcing the archive footage appears to have only had one eye on the job and I found that the commentary seemed to go off the beaten track. But it’s dirt cheap and does have its share of interesting clips.”

Hercules
Director: Roger Young
(Spirit Entertainment)
Reviewed in Issue 2 of History of War

“The film has surprisingly high production values for a title you’ve likely never heard of, but the telling of the story is just too wishy-washy to truly capture the imagination.”

I Am Soldier
Director: Ronnie Thompson
(Lionsgate)
Reviewed in Issue 4 of History of War

“I Am Soldier follows the fortunes of a military chef as he undertakes the gruelling SAS selection process. There is a twist of sorts, but for the most part the plot is fairly predictable and you feel like you’ve been here many times before.”

Lee & Grant
Director: N/A
(History)
Reviewed in Issue 5 of History of War

“Originally made for the History Channel, this TV programme focuses on the American Civil War’s two main protagonists. Lee & Grant is a decent introduction to the Civil War, but will no doubt leave you wanting more.”

Love and Honor
Director: Danny Mooney
(High Fliers)
Reviewed in Issue 5 of History of War

“In this, the Vietnam War is more of a sub-plot than the central theme. It’s a poor cousin of Pearl Harbour, but it’s a good choice for a not-too-taxing night in. Just don’t expect an explosion fest.”

Merlin’s Revenge: The Grail Wars
Director: Steve Barron
(Three Wolves)
Reviewed in Issue 4 of History of War

“Merlin’s Revenge: The Grail Wars is a reasonably enjoyable fantasy adventure that deserves a couple of hours of your time, if only for the pretty cinematography. The film has its fair share of flaws, but enjoy this movie for what it is – or, rather, isn’t.”

The Patrol
Director: Tom Petch
(Soda Pictures)
Reviewed in Issue 5 of History of War

“A terrific little British war film that was overlooked by the cinema-going public. The film’s writer-director was a serving squaddie for eight years, so he has an ear for military language. You won’t find much in the way of pyrotechnics here – The Patrol is smarter than that.”

The Philadelphia Experiment
Director: Paul Ziller
(Anchor Bay)
Reviewed in Issue 1 of History of War

“The US denies that Area 51 ever happened, though its managed to spawn two movies. Both are included here and it’s all good fun, but take it with a large pinch of salt.”

Private Peaceful
Director: Pat O’Connor
(Spirit Entertainment)

Reviewed in Issue 4 of History of War

“The film does justice to the original story by illustrating the harsh realities of war. While its unlikely to win any awards, Private Peaceful is a tale that will tug at the heartstrings.”

Saving General Yang
Director: Ronnie Yu
(Universal Pictures)
Reviewed in Issue 1 of History of War

“The story centres around a group of warrior sons who attempt to rescue their General father from imprisonment by a rival army and the ensuing battle sequences are beautifully choreographed. But the film is let down by subtitles that change too quickly.”

Seven Samurai: BFI 60th Anniversary Edition
Director: Akira Kurosawa
(BFI)
Reviewed in Issue 5 of History of War

“This film’s influence on films in other genres, like ‘The Magnificent Seven,’ is well documented. The battle scenes, in particular the final defence of the village, are jaw-dropping. An uncommonly unpoetic offering at the time.”

The Submarines of World War II: The Silent Service
Director: N/A
(History)
Reviewed in Issue 3 of History of War

“This collection of documentaries grabs your attention from the get-go. The story of these hidden killers is well worth hearing.”

Spirits of the Somme
Director: Bob Carruthers
(Beckmann Visual Publishing)
Reviewed in Issue 1 of History of War

“In awe-inspiring clarity, we see hundreds of British squaddies cheerily marching, and it all seems very lighthearted and genteel. But this painfully haunting documentary is an absolute must addition to your DVD collection.”

Strikeback: Shadow Warfare
Directors: Michael J Bassett, Julian Holmes and Paul Wilmshurst
(2entertain)
Reviewed in Issue 1 of History of War

“The ten-part series of high drama, nudity and adrenaline is not particularly clever. But Strikeback delivers exactly what it intends to. Think James Bond without the sophistication.”

Triumph of the Will
Director: Leni Riefenstahl
(Go Entertain)
Reviewed in Issue 2 of History of War

“This year sees the 80th anniversary of the 1934 Nuremberg Rally. Ultimately, this is a propaganda film that documents, quite brilliantly, how the words of a few men so enchanted a deeply civilised nation that it sleepwalked into catastrophe.”

Tunes of Glory
Director: Ronald Neame
(Odeon Entertainment)
Reviewed in Issue 4 of History of War

“Tunes of Glory is an engrossing drama starring three of the heavyweights of British cinema – Alec Guinness, John Mills and Susannah York. While Tunes of Glory looks a little dated nowadays, the film’s themes – not to mention the outstanding acting of the cast – are timeless.

Ultimate Warfare
Director: N/A
(Discovery Channel)
Reviewed in Issue 3 of History of War

“There’s a morbid curiosity in all of us that makes us want to know what it was like to fight in some of the most famous, and fiercest battles in history. This three-DVD set aims to satiate that urge, so if you want to know what it’s like to be a real-life soldier in a real-life combat situation, buy this.”

Vikings
Director: Ciaran Donnelly, Ken Girotti and Johan Renck
(20th Century Fox)
Reviewed in Issue 2 of History of War

“The Vikings weren’t exactly known for pussy-footing around. This has undoubtedly been made on a big budget and the sets are breathtaking.”

War Games
Director: Wolfgang Petersen
(Fox)
Reviewed in Issue 3 of History of War

“The mid-eighties was undoubtedly a golden period for cinema, and this is up there with the best of them. The plot keeps you interested for the whole 108 minutes and is an enjoyable drama-suspense.”

All About History is part of Future plc, an international media group and leading digital publisher. Visit our corporate site.

© Future Publishing Limited Quay House, The Ambury , Bath BA1 1UA . All rights reserved. England and Wales company registration number 2008885.


The Erpingham Gate, Norwich

Sir Thomas Erpingham lies buried in the cathedral at Norwich, where he also paid for the building of the Erpingham Gate, the rebuilding of the church of the Dominican Friars and a new East window for the church of the Augustinian Friars.

Erpingham was a seasoned veteran when he participated in the Agincourt campaign. Born in 1357, he had served Henry V’s father (Henry ‘Bolingbroke’) and grandfather (John of Gaunt). He had been a soldier in France and Spain, crusaded in Prussia, made a pilgrimage to the Holy Land and fought the Scots. While in the Holy Land, he may well have acquired the material for the sumptuous chasuble, now in the Victoria and Albert Museum, which bears motifs of a camel. He was elected Knight of the Garter in 1401, and had been Constable of Dover Castle, Warden of the Cinque Ports, Marshal of England, and a member of the Privy Council. Henry V re-appointed him Steward of the Household in 1413.

Given his starring role in Shakespeare’s play Henry V, the early English chroniclers are strangely silent about the role played by Sir Thomas at the Battle of Agincourt. The archives tell us merely that he set out for France with a retinue of 20 men at arms and 60 archers but the Burgundian chroniclers say that he was in charge of the archers – perhaps the most critical position of all.

The Erpingham Gate gives access to the close at Norwich Cathedral and was erected between 1420 and 1435, in a style which matches the west front of the cathedral itself. The exterior of the gate has a small statue of Sir Thomas above, though this was apparently only put in place in the 17th century. The interior displays the Erpingham coat of arms. There are no less than 24 Christian Saints carved in the archway – 12 male and 12 female – a nice example of equal treatment, 600 years before the Equality Act. (Perhaps this has something to do with the fact that Sir Thomas had two wives).


Raamatu ülevaade: Agincourt, autor Stephen Cooper

1415. aasta Agincourti lahing on Inglise võitude seas kõige kuulsam - seda rõhutavad kahe kuningriigi saatuse draama ja Henry V kangelaslikkus, kelle ennetähtaegne surm 1422. aastal tegi temast autori Stephen Cooperi sõnade järgi James Dean tema vanus. See oli võib-olla viimane suurvibu võit, mille Šveitsi haug ja SaksamaaLandsknecht. Prantslaste jaoks on Azincourt (nagu nad seda nimetavad) aga vaid üks paljudest sõjalistest katastroofidest, mida nad on oma pika ajaloo jooksul läbi elanud.

See, mida me Agincourtist teame, pärineb 26 ebausaldusväärsest kroonikast - neist 10 on kirjutatud Inglismaal ja 16 Prantsusmaal ning neist ainult neli on kirjutatud kümne aasta jooksul pärast lahingut. Väeosade arv on vaieldav, ehkki tekkiva konsensuse järgi on 5000–6000 hästi juhtinud inglise keelt (oleme õnnelikud vähesed) võitnud 12 000–20 000 halvasti paigutatud prantslast.

William Shakespeare'i samanimeline 1599. aasta näidend Henry V-st ja hilisemad sellel põhinevad filmid jäädvustavad kuninga ja populariseerivad selliseid bromiide, nagu Jumal on Inglismaa poolel ja üks inglane on väärt 10 prantslast. Romaanid G.A. Henty (Agincourtis, 1897) ja Bernard Cornwell (Azincourt, 2008) tugevdavad neid arusaamu, kuigi ajaloolased nagu Desmond Seward on Henry, eriti tema vangide hukkamise suhtes kriitilised. Erinevalt hiljutistest mälestusüritustest Bannockburnis (1314), on Šoti identiteedi kaitsmiseks ja määratlemiseks peetud lahingu koht Agincourti 600. aastapäeva tähistamine 2015. aasta oktoobris ebamugav, kuna tegemist oli Inglise agressiooniga Prantsuse pinnal, mis kutsus esile keiserlik seiklus.

Mõjutanud Ann CurryAgincourt: uus ajalugu(2005), on Cooper kirjutanud omaette tulemusliku akadeemilise töö - muljetavaldavate illustratsioonide, bibliograafia ja lõpumärkustega -, mis on kättesaadav ka tavalugejale. Hoolimata väiksematest vigadest - näiteks Bouvinesi lahingu väärastamisest aastasse 1314, mitte 1214 -, on see raamat väärt lugemist.


Extraction

Before the Battle of Shrewsbury, Bradmore had been imprisoned on suspicion of using his metalworking skills for illegal purposes — namely counterfeiting coins. After the sixteen-year-old prince Henry had been shot in the face at Shrewsbury, he was released in order to aid him. [3]

Bradmore attended the prince at Kenilworth, where the wounded Henry had been taken after the battle. An arrow penetrated on the left side below the eye and beside the nose of the young prince. When surgeons tried to remove the arrow, the shaft broke, leaving the barbed point embedded in his skull some five to six inches deep, narrowly missing the brain stem, and surrounding arteries. Several other physicians had already been called on to resolve the problem, but were unable to help. Bradmore's successor as royal surgeon, Thomas Morestede, later called them "lewd chattering leeches". [4]

Bradmore instructed honey to be poured into the wound and invented an instrument to be used in the extraction. Two threaded tongs held a centre threaded tong, which could be inserted into the wound: the shape not unlike a corkscrew inside a split cylinder. The centre rod, once it located the shaft of the arrowhead, could be inserted into the socket and it, along with the device could be extracted. The instrument was quickly made, either by Bradmore or by a blacksmith to Bradmore's specifications. Bradmore himself guided it into the wound to extract the arrowhead successfully. [3] The wound was then filled with alcohol (wine) to cleanse it.


Pre WWI

Pre WWI books. Battles and wars before 1914, from ancient Greece to the Boer war.

A Wargamer's Guide to 1066 and the Norman Conquest
By: Daniel Mersey
A Wargamer's Guide to The Anglo-Zulu War
By: Daniel Mersey
A Wargamer's Guide to the Early Roman Empire
By: Daniel Mersey
A Waterloo Hero
The Adventures of Friedrich Lindau
By: Andrew Uffindell
Introduction by: James Bogle
AD69: Emperors, Armies and Anarchy
By: Dr Nic Fields
Admiral Albert Hastings Markham
A Victorian Tale of Triumph, Tragedy and Exploration
By: Frank Jastrzembski
Admiral of the Blue
The Life and Times of Admiral John Childs Purvis 1747 - 1825
By: Iain Gordon
Aetius
Attila’s Nemesis
By: Ian Hughes
After Yorktown
The Final Struggle for American Independence
By: Don Glickstein
Agincourt
By: Michael K Jones
Foreword by: Bernard Cornwell
Agincourt 1415
A Tourist's Guide to the Campaign
By: Anne Curry, Peter Hoskins
Agincourt 1415: Field of Blood
By: Barry Renfrew
Agincourt Myth and Reality 1415-2015
By: Stephen Cooper
Albuera 1811
The Bloodiest Battle of the Peninsular War
By: Guy Dempsey
Ali Pasha, Lion of Ioannina
The Remarkable Life of the Balkan Napoleon
By: Dr Quentin Russell, Dr Eugenia Russell

Disclosure: Military History books are affiliates of the suppliers on this website and will earn a commission if you click through and make a purchase.


October 11, 2015

"Do you think if you ran again — could run again and did run again — you would be elected?" "I do."

President Obama answers Steve Kroft immediately and in 2 short words. just now on "60 Minutes."

The UW lab volunteers on psilocybin love the string cheese: "They find it very fun because it’s very stringy."

That's my favorite detail from this long article about the study of "pharmacologically-aided psychotherapy" here at the University of Wisconsin.

The subjects can "put on eye shades and headphones," "wear an anti-anxiety blanket," and listen to music that "ranges from contemplative, chanting and classical to Beatles arrangements with no lyrics." (What's wrong with lyrics? Too influential?)

There's a description of one 62-year-old subject's experience:

This 5'10" man was held at sword point by a 5'7" woman who had trained in medieval combat with the Society for Creative Anachronism.

Dolley is only upset that the intruder ruined her sleep and angered her cat.

“At the end of the day, I’m glad to know that even if I wake up in the middle of the night, I’m not going down without a fight,” Dolley said.

Elaborate NYT graphic makes me think something quite different from what they want me to think.

"Here are 120 million Monopoly pieces, roughly one for every household in the United States," says the text, and we see a large pile of green Monopoly "houses" (blocking the view of the White House), and when we try to scroll down, the screen zooms in, and we see a few red Monopoly "hotels" on the top of the pile. The text changes to: "Just 158 families have provided nearly half of the early money for efforts to capture the White House."

This is a great graphic. Loved it. But it got me thinking, and I read this:

Now, first of all, we're talking about spending money on speech, that's what Citizens United "legalized." I'm putting "legalized," in quotes, because what the Supreme Court did in Citizens United was to perceive the existence of a constitutional right, a right to spend money on speech. These are not contributions to the presidential campaigns, but companies [in Citizens United and families and their companies in the NYT study] spending their own money to get their opinions out into the marketplace of ideas, just as The New York Times corporation spends its money to get its ideas out, including its idea that there's something spurious about corporations engaging in political speech.

And, second, if we're talking about families — 158 families — how are they "overwhelmingly. male"? Are there a lot of gay men spending this money or just heterosexual couples who somehow produce far more sons than daughters? Or is it that the NYT is operating within the old stereotype that sees a family with a man in it as headed by the man?

That said, what I really want to talk about is that pile of Monopoly houses, far, far outnumbering the hotels. There are 120 million households, and 158 spend half of what is spent, and amount that's only $176 million. If all of the households gave just $5, that would be $600 million, vastly overwhelming those supposedly fearsome, overspending, rich, white men. That money could be given directly to that candidate (since it comes, obviously, nowhere near the limit).

Instead of complaining about 158 families spending $176 million (which strikes me as a fairly paltry amount, especially since only $2,700 can be given to a candidate), the clamor should be about the need for everyone to give just a little money to someone. Skip one cup of coffee, one cheeseburger, one movie, and give the money to the candidate you like best. It could be so easy.

And yet bitching about those terrible rich people — those terrible male white people — serves other political interests. interests that the rich white males who own The New York Times have a constitutional right to push with all the powerful rhetoric and lovely graphics they can muster.

ADDED: Why did the NYT draw the line at 158 families? Why not analyze the top 150 families or the top 200? I can't help feeling that the Times drew the line where it would make the other facts seem most dramatic. We're told they contributed "nearly half of the early money." Why not draw the line at exactly half? If we included the next 10% or 20% or 30% of the early money, how many families would we see and how different would the conclusions have to be?

The rich people who own the New York Times, and the reporters and editors who work for them, are very clear about their own First Amendment right to devote corporate assets to weighing in on the issues of the day, but they are eager to deprive everyone else of the same right, especially those who don’t agree with their far-left perspective.

What the New York Times really objects to is diversity. The only way to get free speech nowadays–diverse free speech, anyway–is to pay for it. Thank God there are a handful of people with the means and the will to do so.


Watch the video: Tobias Capwell Wallace Collection on Agincourt, armour u0026 arrows exhibition September. Part 1 (January 2022).