Boxing Day

[Llewthepoet]

Boxing Day has passed on December 31. I just want to know what exactly is it? From my understanding, I thought it was like Christmas, like you wrap your presents in boxes. Help me out Canadians and Englishmen!<br><br>Did you know that the English has never lost a battle in England since 1066, at the battle of Hastings by William, Duke of Normandy. That is impressive!!! Normans=Normandy, France. You know, the site of D-Day in WWII.<br><br>By the way the expression crossing "the pond." It is a pretty deep pond. Don't you think.

[Bocaj Claw]

Yes. You would need a huge rock to skip across such a pond.

[Tom Flapwell]

Where is Boxing Day not on December 26th?

[Gizensha]

The Canadian/British boxing day is the term given to December 26th, day after Christmas. So called because traditionally you'd devote the actual 25th to the celebration of Jesus's birth, and open your pressies on the 26th.<br><br>Not sure what this January 31st boxing day you're on about is, though.

[likeafox]

December 26: Boxing day in Canada is the day after Christmas when all the electronics stores have sales and I buy cheap stuff. I wasn't around for it this year.<br><br>In Italy, Dec 26 is St. Stephen's Day, btw, and it's one of the 100 days every year where everything is closed and there is nothing to do <!--emo&:)--><img src='http://definecynical.mancubus.net/forum ... /smile.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile.gif' /><!--endemo-->

[Steve the Pocket]

<a href='http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boxing_day' target='_blank'>Info on Boxing Day</a>. Incidentally, the last theory listed under "Origins" is the one I'd always heard.

[Rooster]

I don't know where it comes from, but I know that every year the officers and enlisted men in the British Army swich roles for the day so the squaddies can have one day of ordering their leaders about.

[likeafox]

We call it Boxing Day because every year we get a bunch of stupid Christmas presents that are only interesting for the first day, so on the 26th we put all our presents in boxes and put them in the closet to be forgotten about.

[Muninn]

<!--QuoteBegin-Asterikboy86+Jan 14 2006, 06:50 PM--> <table border='0' align='center' width='95%' ><tr><td class='quotetop'><b>Quote:</b> (Asterikboy86 @ Jan 14 2006, 06:50 PM)</td></tr><tr><td class='quotebody'> Did you know that the English has never lost a battle in England since 1066, at the battle of Hastings by William, Duke of Normandy. That is impressive!!! <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table> <!--QuoteEEnd--><br> Not only that it was also apparently the last time any foreign power (probably not counting the Scottish though) got an army into mainland English soil.

[Gizensha]

<!--QuoteBegin-Jack Ravendawn+Jan 15 2006, 12:05 PM--> <table border='0' align='center' width='95%' ><tr><td class='quotetop'><b>Quote:</b> (Jack Ravendawn @ Jan 15 2006, 12:05 PM)</td></tr><tr><td class='quotebody'> <!--QuoteBegin-Asterikboy86+Jan 14 2006, 06:50 PM--> <table border='0' align='center' width='95%' ><tr><td class='quotetop'><b>Quote:</b> (Asterikboy86 @ Jan 14 2006, 06:50 PM)</td></tr><tr><td class='quotebody'> Did you know that the English has never lost a battle in England since 1066, at the battle of Hastings by William, Duke of Normandy. That is impressive!!! <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table> <!--QuoteEEnd--><br>Not only that it was also apparently the last time any foreign power (probably not counting the Scottish though) got an army into mainland English soil. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table> <!--QuoteEEnd--><br> Couldn't that point technically be contended on the fact that the previous King of England had promissed the throne to William, and as such King Harold could be considered an illegal King with William the Conquoror being the English power, and King Harold being, essentially, a domestic rebel?

[Muninn]

<!--QuoteBegin-Gizensha+Jan 15 2006, 02:06 PM--> <table border='0' align='center' width='95%' ><tr><td class='quotetop'><b>Quote:</b> (Gizensha @ Jan 15 2006, 02:06 PM)</td></tr><tr><td class='quotebody'> <!--QuoteBegin-Jack Ravendawn+Jan 15 2006, 12:05 PM--> <table border='0' align='center' width='95%' ><tr><td class='quotetop'><b>Quote:</b> (Jack Ravendawn @ Jan 15 2006, 12:05 PM)</td></tr><tr><td class='quotebody'> <!--QuoteBegin-Asterikboy86+Jan 14 2006, 06:50 PM--> <table border='0' align='center' width='95%' ><tr><td class='quotetop'><b>Quote:</b> (Asterikboy86 @ Jan 14 2006, 06:50 PM)</td></tr><tr><td class='quotebody'> Did you know that the English has never lost a battle in England since 1066, at the battle of Hastings by William, Duke of Normandy. That is impressive!!! <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table> <!--QuoteEEnd--><br>Not only that it was also apparently the last time any foreign power (probably not counting the Scottish though) got an army into mainland English soil. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table> <!--QuoteEEnd--><br>Couldn't that point technically be contended on the fact that the previous King of England had promissed the throne to William, and as such King Harold could be considered an illegal King with William the Conquoror being the English power, and King Harold being, essentially, a domestic rebel? <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table> <!--QuoteEEnd--><br> Medieval politics is confusing and trecherous enough. The English were understandably upset by having a foreign Frenchman at power (William never learned English), just like the French were later in the Hundred Years War over English claims to their court. Who knows what really transpired between Edward the Confessor, Harold and William.<br><br>Furthermore, there's also <a href='http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edgar_%C3%86theling' target='_blank'>the forgotten king.</a>

[Gizensha]

<!--QuoteBegin-Jack Ravendawn+Jan 15 2006, 01:25 PM--> <table border='0' align='center' width='95%' ><tr><td class='quotetop'><b>Quote:</b> (Jack Ravendawn @ Jan 15 2006, 01:25 PM)</td></tr><tr><td class='quotebody'> <!--QuoteBegin-Gizensha+Jan 15 2006, 02:06 PM--> <table border='0' align='center' width='95%' ><tr><td class='quotetop'><b>Quote:</b> (Gizensha @ Jan 15 2006, 02:06 PM)</td></tr><tr><td class='quotebody'> <!--QuoteBegin-Jack Ravendawn+Jan 15 2006, 12:05 PM--> <table border='0' align='center' width='95%' ><tr><td class='quotetop'><b>Quote:</b> (Jack Ravendawn @ Jan 15 2006, 12:05 PM)</td></tr><tr><td class='quotebody'> <!--QuoteBegin-Asterikboy86+Jan 14 2006, 06:50 PM--> <table border='0' align='center' width='95%' ><tr><td class='quotetop'><b>Quote:</b> (Asterikboy86 @ Jan 14 2006, 06:50 PM)</td></tr><tr><td class='quotebody'> Did you know that the English has never lost a battle in England since 1066, at the battle of Hastings by William, Duke of Normandy. That is impressive!!! <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table> <!--QuoteEEnd--><br>Not only that it was also apparently the last time any foreign power (probably not counting the Scottish though) got an army into mainland English soil. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table> <!--QuoteEEnd--><br>Couldn't that point technically be contended on the fact that the previous King of England had promissed the throne to William, and as such King Harold could be considered an illegal King with William the Conquoror being the English power, and King Harold being, essentially, a domestic rebel? <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table> <!--QuoteEEnd--><br>Medieval politics is confusing and trecherous enough. The English were understandably upset by having a foreign Frenchman at power (William never learned English), just like the French were later in the Hundred Years War over English claims to their court. Who knows what really transpired between Edward the Confessor, Harold and William.<br><br>Furthermore, there's also <a href='http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edgar_%C3%86theling' target='_blank'>the forgotten king.</a> <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table> <!--QuoteEEnd--><br> Plus it could easially be hypothesised that William the Conquorer won the Battle of Hastings because the... Was it Norwegian? King landed on the British coast to claim title first, thus by the battle of Hastings the English army had marched a great distance north, faught a battle, marched the great distance south again plus a bit, meanwhile the Norman army had had time to rest after finding a favourable battle ground. If the Normans had have landed first, England could easially have had the Norwegian (assuming I'm remembering the country right) king at that instance, which would have presumably chaned the shape of the past 1000 years of European history.

[Muninn]

Also, I am quite certain Harold would be able to use his home advantage and quick recruitment ability to great effect against William if he had arrived first. Also as I remember (I may be wrong) Harold had a larger army.<br><br>History could have been different if the Normans lost. Normandy could have become a significant power in their mainland European holdings. Perhaps overpowering the French court in time and extending to modern day Dutch and Belgian lands. They might have played a significant role in the age of exploration if they held power and perhaps lend assistance to the Spanish Armada. They could have been involved in the Napoleonic Wars and perhaps crumbled along with other empires after World War I.