I sympathize with him more than the scots desu

I sympathize with him more than the scots tbh

Homeless People Are Sexy Shirt $21.68

UFOs Are A Psyop Shirt $21.68

Homeless People Are Sexy Shirt $21.68

  1. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    you're a gay british?

  2. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    Longshanks did nothing wrong.

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      imagine if they had bombard cannons senpai

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      Trebuchets are cool.

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      Frick off chud, he killed 6 million scots with his fire trebuchets

  3. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    I sympathize with the actor because they just put a mail coif over his head with no padding lmao.

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      Yeah and the mail looks like shit too. Just a bunch of loosely interlinked metal loops that wouldn’t do shit. A man of Edward’s status would have had high quality riveted mail.

  4. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    The problem with Scotland. Is that it's filled with Scots.

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      So true

  5. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    Why?

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      he just wanted to use his trebuchet

  6. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    you would

  7. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    I don't, but he was a magnificent butthole that stole every scene he was in.

  8. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    No, contrarian incel, you don't.

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      >No, contrarian incel, you don't.

      • 2 years ago
        Anonymous

        >these guys are getting more pussy than you
        How the frick does that make you look good lmao

  9. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    > pushes his sons bumboy out of the window
    based

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      >Choose to be gay when you can impregnate Sophie Marceau

      Jeez

  10. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    did you know he kicked the israelites out of England?

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      Why did Mel make him the bad guy? Expelling heebs makes up for all the Scotland shenanigans

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      To be fair, who hasn’t

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      It was his father Henry III who welcomed them back after Simon de Montfort originally kicked them out/massacred them. He was just undoing his father’s frick up.

      • 2 years ago
        Anonymous

        the israelites were let back in by oliver cromwell actually

      • 2 years ago
        Anonymous

        >de
        I'm literally seething.
        Fricking Normans.

        • 2 years ago
          Anonymous

          Reading post 1066 English medieval history is depressing with all nobles name Hugh, Guy, Piers and Roger. Frick William the Bastard.

          • 2 years ago
            Anonymous

            The Normans, being degenerate Frankoids, naturally added cuckoldry to the story of King Arthur too.

            • 2 years ago
              Anonymous

              The Normans were French-speaking Scandis. Norman = Northman.

              • 2 years ago
                Anonymous

                You know that Rollo married a Frank and pretty much all the Scandies eventually intermarried right?

              • 2 years ago
                Anonymous

                …And the Franks were French-speaking Germans.

              • 2 years ago
                Anonymous

                I never said they weren't?

              • 2 years ago
                Anonymous

                More than just French speaking, they were culturally French, and Scandinavian only by genetics, if that.

              • 2 years ago
                Anonymous

                >only by genetics
                The most important part.

              • 2 years ago
                Anonymous

                They were hardly Scandinavian genetically they had arrived over 200 years prior to William the Conqueror invading England and mixed instantly with French noblewomen

              • 2 years ago
                Anonymous

                Which is why I added the “if that” at the end. More studies need to be done since nobody seems to know how genetically scandi they were.

                [...]
                This. They were more closely related to Moors and Sephardi than they were to any Germanic people.

                Wrong. They were Franko-Gallic. Go leave.

              • 2 years ago
                Anonymous

                >Franko-Gallic
                Yeah exactly what I meant. They were swarthy like their cousins across the Pyrenees.

              • 2 years ago
                Anonymous

                Franks=the most powerful Germanic tribe in the waning days of the Western Roman Empire and centuries after its collapse.
                Gauls=indigenous Celtic people who inhabited France during the time of Julius Caesar.

                Franko-Gallic=a mixture of the two. Not Moors, not Sephardi. The Iberian peninsula itself remained predominantly Hispanic Celtic during they heyday of Andalusia, regardless of what religion they followed.

              • 2 years ago
                Anonymous

                man virtually everyone outside of England was practically Black. Ben Franklin even said so.

              • 2 years ago
                Anonymous

                The Normans were French-speaking Scandis. Norman = Northman.

                Normans weren’t even genetically Scandinavian lol. At least not the ones who conquered England

                > “It is also interesting to note that few of the participating nobles in the Battle of Hastings were from the Cotentin Peninsula. Moreover, and none were reported to have supplied ships.This would suggest a clear demarcation between Lower Normandy and the Cotentin Peninsula. In part, this demarcation could reflect continued resentment of William’s rule within this region, insofar as the revolt of 1047 discussed earlier was in fact led by a prominent Cotentin lord. Still another trend which is of interest is the relationship between the nobles’ and knights’ origins and the relative density of early Viking settlement in the duchy. According to a map of settlement names, there was a high density of Viking settlers in the Cotentin Peninsula and the Pays de Caux region. It is in precisely these regions where fewer Norman combatants originated, as opposed to the Bessin region around Bayeux which had far fewer Viking settlement names and thus fewer descendants of viking settlers. Therefore, the Normans who fought at the Battle of Hastings were more likely to have possessed French than Viking/Nordic ancestry.” (The Geographic origin of the Norman conquerors of England, Christopher MacDonald Hewitt).

              • 2 years ago
                Anonymous

                They were hardly Scandinavian genetically they had arrived over 200 years prior to William the Conqueror invading England and mixed instantly with French noblewomen

                This. They were more closely related to Moors and Sephardi than they were to any Germanic people.

              • 2 years ago
                Anonymous

                >tfw no French princess wife

                How do you explain all the fair features in England then?

            • 2 years ago
              Anonymous

              The word cuckold was literally invented in medieval France

            • 2 years ago
              Anonymous

              The Normans were French-speaking Scandis. Norman = Northman.

              You do realise Normandy was conquered by the the Anjous in the early 12th century so Plantagenet kings from Henry II were basically frenchies in every way.

        • 2 years ago
          Anonymous

          Reading post 1066 English medieval history is depressing with all nobles name Hugh, Guy, Piers and Roger. Frick William the Bastard.

          The Normans, being degenerate Frankoids, naturally added cuckoldry to the story of King Arthur too.

          The normans made England relevant. The Anglo-Saxons were mudhut dwelers. If William the Conquerer hadn't civilised the Island, England would have remained an irrelevant Scandanavian tier country.
          Not only that, but post-conquest history is infinitley more interesting than the Anglo-Saxon period.

          • 2 years ago
            Anonymous

            You know nothing about the Anglo-Saxon period though lmao.
            William the Bastard < Alfred the Great

            • 2 years ago
              Anonymous

              >You know nothing about the Anglo-Saxon period though lmao.
              I do. I know they were routinley raped by vikings and didn't even have catsles until the Normans brought them.

              • 2 years ago
                Anonymous

                >shows a incorrect understanding of history
                lol
                The Anglo-Saxons came up with the burh system which was copied by other Euro kingdoms.
                England has always been influential.
                It was before the Romans, it was after the Romans and it was before & after the Normans.

          • 2 years ago
            Anonymous

            >The Anglo-Saxons were mudhut dwelers

            Not really. The Anglo-Saxons and especially Alfred made the basis of what England became - Christianity, literature, common law etc.

            • 2 years ago
              Anonymous

              >Christianity
              Was already being practiced by the Britons before the Anglo-Saxons arrived.
              >common law etc
              The biggest developments in common law came in the reign of Henry II, not Alfred or his descendants.

              >crackhead poster claiming to own the "if" time machine in his head that only he can see and use

              there's a reason you are posting here while not ruling the world, cracknon.

              mad.

              Normans introduced usury and slavery to England and brought it into constant wars with mainland Europe.

              Slavery very much existed in the Anglo-Saxon world before 1066. The Normans and their descendants may have brought continental wars, but with them came more continetal power and relevancy.

              • 2 years ago
                Anonymous

                How did continental power and relevancy benefit the average person? It only benefits bloodthirsty israelites, foreign occupiers and nationalist homosexuals who stroke their tiny dicks to the thought of wars from 1000 years ago

              • 2 years ago
                Anonymous

                ww2 was thousands of years ago...

              • 2 years ago
                Anonymous

                It benefits the average person by bringing more wealth into their country and making their lives better, and the nobles of medieval countries weren’t israelites and nationalism is based

              • 2 years ago
                Anonymous

                >the nobles of medieval countries weren’t israelites
                Yes they were. Sometimes they were more wealthy than even the king. It's a well established fact that the Norman conquest brought the israelites to England and the peasants of England were all the worse off for it.

              • 2 years ago
                Anonymous

                >Yes they were. Sometimes they were more wealthy than even the king.
                So in your reality, being more wealthy = being israeli?
                >It's a well established fact that the Norman conquest brought the israelites to England
                Was it the nobles who did that? Or the King?
                >and the peasants of England were all the worse off for it.
                How so? Be specific.

              • 2 years ago
                Anonymous

                >how so
                The Harrying.
                Literally destroyed northern wealth.

              • 2 years ago
                Anonymous

                >The Harrying.
                >Literally destroyed northern wealth.
                That nothing to do with the israelites.

                Cnut didn't genocide and exile everyone who resisted him.

                The harrying of the north was not a genocide, now go back to leftypol.

              • 2 years ago
                Anonymous

                The only leftypol here is you israelite loving Norman

              • 2 years ago
                Anonymous

                >harrying of the north was not a genocide
                lmao you fricking uneducated mongrel.
                >leftypol
                Are you moronic?
                They would never admit to a genocide of white people.

              • 2 years ago
                Anonymous

                >nothing to do with israelites
                What do you think the Normans needed all that pillaged northern wealth for?

              • 2 years ago
                Anonymous

                >So in your reality, being more wealthy = being israeli?
                No as in they were literally israeli. Stop with your tricks. I know what you're up to.

              • 2 years ago
                Anonymous

                William the conquer brought israelites to England with him because you know...they fund wars.

              • 2 years ago
                Anonymous

                >How did continental power and relevancy benefit the average person?
                Well, if you are merchant, burgess, or city dweller your homeland being opened up to more markets on the continent will boost the prosperity of your land, your city and yourself. How do better quality products not help the average person?

                >shows a incorrect understanding of history
                lol
                The Anglo-Saxons came up with the burh system which was copied by other Euro kingdoms.
                England has always been influential.
                It was before the Romans, it was after the Romans and it was before & after the Normans.

                >The Anglo-Saxons came up with the burh system which was copied by other Euro kingdoms.
                Which other kingdoms specifically copied it?
                >It was before the Romans
                England did not exist beofre the Romans, the Anglo-Saxons only arrived after Romans withdrew from the Island.

              • 2 years ago
                Anonymous

                >other kingdoms specifically copied it
                Henry the Fowler is the only one I remember off the top of my head because of his name.
                Haven't read those papers in over a decade since I left uni though.
                >england didnt exist before the romans
                It ruins the flow if I start changing the name of what I'm talking about midway.
                Gotta keep things simple for online discussion.

            • 2 years ago
              Anonymous
              • 2 years ago
                Anonymous

                Do not post my wife.

              • 2 years ago
                Anonymous

                I can save her.

          • 2 years ago
            Anonymous

            >crackhead poster claiming to own the "if" time machine in his head that only he can see and use

            there's a reason you are posting here while not ruling the world, cracknon.

          • 2 years ago
            Anonymous

            Normans introduced usury and slavery to England and brought it into constant wars with mainland Europe.

          • 2 years ago
            Anonymous

            You aren’t entirely wrong but you go way too far to try and make people mad for fun. The Anglo saxons were cool too

          • 2 years ago
            Anonymous

            The real question to ask is why Cnut’s conquest didn’t last but William’s did.

            • 2 years ago
              Anonymous

              Cnut didn't genocide and exile everyone who resisted him.

  11. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    PRIMA
    NOCTA

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      Lol this is such an absurd concept, no one is going to accept the rule of someone who forces them to turn over their virgin brides to be fricked.

      • 2 years ago
        Anonymous

        You shill for Republicans for free on Cinemaphile.
        >plz billionaires tell me what 2 b angry at 2day!!!

        • 2 years ago
          Anonymous

          >You shill for Republicans for free on Cinemaphile.
          >>plz billionaires tell me what 2 b angry at 2day!!!

        • 2 years ago
          Anonymous

          meds

  12. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    Do you have a disappointing gay son?

  13. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    >*Hadrian* enters the chat

  14. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    Disturbing lack of chins itt in general

  15. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    the real longshanks was a badarse
    william wallace and the rest of the scots back then and today were and are a bunch of pussies

  16. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    >*kills your democratically elected king and government*
    >*enslaves you*
    >*steals your money*
    >*introduces israelites and usury to steal even more of it*
    >*brings in foreigners*
    >*genocides half your country leaving it poor and destitute for a thousand years*
    >*sends you off to fight in foreign wars*
    >*marries a midget*
    >*sires one homosexual, one moron and one israelite to rule over you after he's gone*
    >*becomes a fat frick*
    >*falls off his horse and dies*
    >*body is left to rot for days before it gets buried*
    >*obese corpse erupts noxious gas after being forced into coffin because it was too fat to fit in the first place*

  17. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    >cast an Irish chad to play a British king
    Based Mel.

  18. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    because you are a homosexual and you'd probably suck the rothchilds dick if you had the chance

  19. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    >raised a homosexual son
    He gets no sympathy from me.

  20. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    arrows cost money, the dead cost nothing. pic rel

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *