I particularly love the claim that there was no incest... I mean the noble families only married with other noble families, and they were largely interrelated... but no, no incest. Marrying your cousin who happens to be your cousin on both sides because you mother and father were also cousins and so were hers totally doesn't count as incest. Really.
It's also interesting how a person who wrote seven books on warfare in the middle ages is saying that there wasn't much violence. Sorry, but last I checked, a cavalry charge that breaks the infantry and is followed by riding the poor sods down counts as violence, no matter how short it may be. And, you know, the battle of Hastings "turned on chance factors such as a leader's death" so it's totally unrealistic to depict is a large battle where hundreds of soldiers did horrible violent deaths by sword, spear, and axe, right? Most battle were over in minutes, but one lone Viking warrior held Stamford Bridge against five thousand Saxons for over an hour. This is history, folks, and the worst part? There's no possible the asshole who wrote that article doesn't know it.
He's not just a pretentious douche. He's also deliberately deceiving people to serve some end.
Fucker should be stripped of his god damned Ph.D.
