Downd nhac chuong hot ve dien thoai
Crécy: Battle of Five Kings: Part 2 (Professor Livingston, I refute)
2024.04.10 22:28 Hergrim Crécy: Battle of Five Kings: Part 2 (Professor Livingston, I refute)
This is Part 2 of a two-part series meant to be read together. It explains why Michael Livingston’s *Crécy: Battle of Five Kings is badhistory.
To read the first part of this series, a summary of Livingston’s arguments, click here.
As with the first post, many thanks to u/Valkine for giving feedback on these posts.
Introduction
As I mentioned in the first post, I began to have doubts about the exact location DeVries and Livingston originally proposed in 2015. If you look on a map, you’ll see that the road from Abbeville to Hesdin leads through the spot where Livingston and DeVries situated Edward’s army. Their reasoning was that Phillipe didn’t want to follow Edward, but instead get ahead of him and so went via Saint-Riquier, where a substantial part of his army was quartered, and from there went west as his scouts had told him Edward hadn’t yet crossed the Maye, coming up the slope from Domvast and into battle1 .
After reflection, this didn’t really sit well with me. Why go to all that trouble, and travel all that distance, when you could simply head him off near Canchy, completely blocking Edward’s path unless he wanted to risk going through a forest knowing he had an enemy would could race ahead of him or go west towards the marshes in the hope of crossing the Authie at a smoldering Rue, having an enemy hot on his heels? I tried to come up with various alternatives but, in hindsight, none of them would be as suitable as their proposed site for a final stand.
Livingston’s modified itinerary and account of Philippe’s journey in Crécy: Battle of Five Kings suggests he was asked or asked himself about some of the points I had doubts about, and he came up with an alternative that we’ve already seen originally, which had Philippe trying to head Edward off from the river Authie, before swinging back down on finding Edward static above Domvast. As with my initial doubts, this route didn’t make much sense for me, although for different reasons as I’ll get into down below.
First, though, let’s take a look at the site Livingston and DeVries have proposed.
Part 2: Arguments For Tradition
1 - The New Location
If you haven’t already seen the maps of the proposed new location, quickly go back to the first post and get them up, because I want you to compare them to the map I’ve made.
My Map
You may notice a few differences from Livingston and DeVries’ maps. The only important changes are that there’s no place called the Jardin de Genève, only one called au Jardin de Genève, and the windmill is no longer within the wagenburg. Why, you ask? The first is because of 3P1332/7 of the Somme Archives, otherwise known as the 1832 cadastral map of an area known as the Chemin des Chauffours2 , while the second is due to the 1757 Cassini map.
Let’s start with the Cassini map.
The mill depicted - an oil mill, not a flour mill - didn’t exist in 1832, when the cadastral maps were made, and left no certain impression on field names3 . I’ve also not been able to locate any other source that might identify its location. The Cassini map, however, should be good enough to demonstrate that it was not between the Bois de But and the Forêt de Crécy. While it’s not 100% in locating things, it is accurate in relative terms. That’s to say, any given town or windmill might be hundreds of metres or even a kilometre or so from where it would be on modern maps, the relative position between windmills and their towns is broadly accurate to what the 19th century cadastral maps show. The mill might not be exactly between the Bois de But and Notre-Dame-De-Foy, but it will still be between them.
This is the first bit of badhistory, because I cannot see how, in good faith, you can place a mill where Livingston and DeVries have. I’d say that the ball is firmly in their court to prove that it could be there and, as the surrounding villages have their own, closer, mills, that the oil mill is medieval.
The second point we need to address is the fields known as au Jardin de Genève. I suspect that Livingston and DeVries have here decided that, because the fields are close by the bowl in the ground where they believe the Genoese died, that bowl must have been known as the Jardin de Genève. However, there’s no evidence for this beyond deductive reasoning and, what’s more, those fields labeled au Jardin de Genève extend all the way to the Chemin Des Maillets. That is, those fields go into and up out of the bowl. If the name applies to all of them, or even to the whole length of the long field the name mostly covers, then the bowl cannot be the Jardin de Genève because it is already au Jardin de Genève.
I’m not going to deny here that Genève couldn’t refer to the Genoese. Livingston should have referred to a document that had a phrase like “des galées de Gênes” to make his point rather than a dictionary reference that doesn’t really show the variations in spelling that could occur, but his point still stands4 . However, the question about how we can know that the name refers to an area where the Genoese died remains. Why does it sound like an 18th century aristocrat once tried to grow some plants from Geneva (aka Genève) near the fields, rather than that the field was near a bloody catastrophe? It also doesn't discount the possibility that junipers were indeed once grown near the fields. It's a linguistic possibility, and their absence in the modern landscape doesn't prove their absence in earlier periods.
Moving on, let’s also consider where the place in the English formation Livingston has Philippe attacking. You might not be able to see it clearly in my screenshotted map, but Livingston has carts between the Bois de But and the gap where the English vanguard is. Right in the middle of this is where he places the Jardin de Genève and the potential ditch that may have later been turned into a phosphate mine. The slope is not impassible, but is definitely quite steep.
Do you see a problem?
“No man is a fool”. Why, why would Philippe send the Genoese up against this position and follow up with cavalry behind them? Even if the Genoese were able to completely drive the English archers behind their barricade of wagons and keep them there, are the French men-at-arms supposed to charge up that steep slope on their expensive horses and, having lost their momentum, somehow push a gap through the carts?
Compare this with the left wing of the English, which is on far flatter terrain and where it would be easier to overcome by infantry assault than the English right, or the open gap between the wagons? If Philippe was no fool and wanted to break into the English enclosure with his cavalry, then why not use his Genoese to soften up the English vanguard and then charge through with his own vanguard? Or, with the urban militias coming up behind the Genoese, why not position them behind the Genoese so that they could advance and clear the wagons in hand-to-hand fighting? The only way committing the Genoese to fight on such unfavorable ground and using his mounted men-at-arms against such an unsuitable target makes sense is if Philippe had already lost control of his army - or was afraid he was about to - but Livingston gives little, if any, hint that he subscribes to this idea.
I’m not sure if this is “bad history” so much as it is “bad historiography”. Having established a key interpretive principle, Livingston goes on to ignore it because proper application would seriously harm his case. “Stupid happens”, as he says, but if stupid happens then an author should say they think it happened, and perhaps even why they think it happened, instead of trying to cast it in a positive light5 .
2 - King Philippe’s Plan
Next up is Philippe’s plan. Livingston contends that Philippe intended to get ahead of the English before they reached the Authie, and that’s why he left so early on the morning of the 26th and why he marched through Saint-Riquier and towards Labroye before cutting back to the new site. This, he suggests, explains the sources mentioning Philippe going through Labroye and matches with some sources that clearly say he left very early.
And several sources do say he left early. The Chronicle of Artois and the related Chronicle of Saint-Omer both agree that Philippe left the town “when he was to hear his mass”, which would be about sunrise, while Gilles le Muisit gives an impression of great haste on Philippe’s part, writing that he followed Edward with “a burning desire” and progressed “hastily” in that pursuit6 .
Several sources also say that Philippe went to a town or place called “La Braie” or “Labroie”. The Grandes Chroniques says that Philippe passed through a town called “La Braye” that was “beside the forest of Crécy” on his way to meet Edward, the Citizen of Valenciennes wrote that Edward went across “La Braie” and “Crécy” while the trailing Philippe to “La Braie” and set up camp there7 . But is that actually enough to establish Philippe’s route?
If we go back to the chronicles of Artois and Saint Omer, it’s interesting to note that their accounts have Philippe leaving early, but “without array and with few men” and without any of his lords or allies. When someone finally approached him about this, Philippe agreed to stop and then “assembled all of his army”, putting the Genoese in front8 . These accounts, then, build in a delay while the rest of Philippe’s army catches up and is put into some sort of order. Gilles le Muisit, although he doesn’t mention any pause, does have the Genoese with Phillipe even though the “greater part” of the army - including the cavalry - followed on behind9 .
And then there’s the matter of Labroie/Labraie. It’s easy to identify the “La Braie” that relates to Edward as the marshy region that he passed by after crossing the Somme, but Philippe’s journey as plotted out by Livingston doesn’t come close to either the town of Labroye or any noticeably marshy areas10 . Although he doesn’t say it outright, I suspect Livingston’s response would be that the chroniclers just got confused by Philippe initially heading towards Labroye and then retreating to it, and so had him visit it twice, but there’s a much simpler answer.
Jacques Sanson, a 17th century antiquarian who lived in Abbeville examined the Battle fo Crécy in some depth for his book L'Histoire Genealogique Des Comtes De Pontieu, Et Maieurs D'Abbeville. He used, in addition to the standard B/C version of Froissart and Giovanni Villani, the Accounts of a Citizen of Valenciennes and the so-called “Tramecourt” manuscript, as well as what seems to be some local traditions11 . Among what I thought were local traditions were king Philippe being between Le Titre and Forest l’Abbaye, heading towards Nouvion, when he heard of where the English were. Then it struck me: what if Sanson was not using a local tradition, but working with the term Labraie/Labroie and thinking about how non-Picards might render “l’Abbaye”?
So, I did some digging. And there, in the Napoleonic cadastral map for Neuilly-L'hopital, I hit the jackpot. Because, although the woods there were labeled Le Bois de L’Hopital, one of the roads passing it was named Chemin du Bois de Labbroye and a field next to the forest is named au bout de Bois de Labbroye. The assembly table makes it clear that “Labbroye” is a version of “l’Abbaye”12 . It actually doesn’t matter whether Philippe went as far as Forest l’Abbaye before realising where Edward was or if he was passing the woods of “Labbroye” at Neuilly-L'hopital, because it offers an explanation of how Philippe could pass through “La Braye” while following the English, which Livingston’s version doesn’t.
Philippe’s plan, then, appears not to have been to get in front of the English, but a rapid pursuit that forced them to fight. The many chronicles referencing Philippe following the English only serve to reinforce this13 . While he was certainly eager to fight and may have left early, the available evidence we have as a whole indicates that he was following behind the English and at one point may have had to pause his pursuit to wait for his army to actually get out of camp and follow him.
*3 - Scheduling Conflicts *
A key part of Livingston’s theory is that, because of how he interprets the English movements, it’s impossible for the English to have arrived at the traditional location in time to set up and prepare for an attack by the French. There are two parts to this: Edward’s letter of the 3rd of September, which states that the English waited at the Blanchetaque until Vespers (6pm) on the 25th, and William Retford’s Kitchen Journal, which says that the English were “in the forest of Crécy” on the 25th14 .
While the Kitchen Journal is difficult to interpret, Edward’s letter is quite unequivocal on the matter:
“our adversary appeared on the other bank…For this reason we waited like this the whole day and the next, until the hour of Vespers.”15
The question is, how literally should we take Edward. That is, should we take it as a given that the entire English army camped near the Blanchetaque, waiting in case the French tried to cross, or should we instead suggest that a token force was left to watch the ford in case the French tried the dangerous crossing against all military reason16 ?
Other sources provide some insight. Michael Northburgh, the king’s secretary, has the English staying by the river on the night of the 24rd and moving off on the 25th to camp “in” the Forest of Crécy and, while he doesn’t give any dates of movement, Richard Wynkeley suggests that Philippe didn’t even arrive at the Blanchetaque and that most of his army may not even arrived17 . Jean le Bel, whose informant was Jean de Beaumont (an advisor to Philippe), agrees with Wynkeley that Philippe and much of his army never made it to the Blanchetaque, and the Grandes Chroniques, a royal annal, puts Philippe in Abbeville all day on the 25th strengthening the decrepit bridge so the army could cross and celebrating the feast of Saint Louis18 .
If there was no significant French force opposite the English on the Somme, as reliable English and French sources attest, then why would Edward remain at the ford with his whole army until evening on the day after he crossed, especially as Livingston reminds us repeatedly how hard opposed “wet-gap” crossings are19 ? There is some merit to the argument that he needed to wait for the parties who had gone to Le Crotoy and who had chased the defeated French, but would he really have waited a full day before moving, knowing how desperate the situation was?
Going back to the Kitchen Journal, Livingston uses it to bolster his arguments by interpreting it through the lens of Edward’s letter. On the 24th, the English are listed as being “beneath the Forest of Crécy”, then on the 25th they are “in the Forest of Crécy”, on the 26th it goes back to the English being “still beneath the Forest of Crécy” and the English are “in the field beneath the Forest of Crécy” on the 27th20 . Since Northburgh helps establish that the English could be camped along the Somme and yet still be “in the Forest of Crécy”, Livingston concludes that the “Forest of Crécy” was not so much a distinct wood for the English, but a region that included various minor woods21 . His logic is that, with Edward establishing the English didn’t leave the Somme until evening on the 25th, references in the Cleopatra Itinerary to the English being on “another side of the Forest of Crécy” and in Northburgh and the Kitchen Journal to the English being “in” the forest on the 25th must merely have meant they were under the eaves of the woods22 .
If you’re thinking to yourself “gee, Hergrim’s already demonstrated that it’s unlikely Edward would think the French were going to try crossing the Somme and Livingston accepts that the Forest of Crécy was probably thought of as a geographic region, so why couldn’t the ‘Forest of Crécy’ include the land above the town, which had a forest behind it?”, then Livingston has pre-empted you. The Kitchen Journal and the Cleopatra Itinerary both say that the army was on the fields “beneath” the Forest of Crécy on the 27th, and why would they say that if the battle really was fought in the traditional location. Wouldn’t it make sense for Edward to stay in comfort at the castle of Crécy or at least one of the houses there23 ?
Sadly for Livingston, we also have Michael Northburgh’s letter. He says, and I quote Livingston’s own translation here, that on the 27th Edward “encamped at Crécy”. Not in the forest, and distinct from the night of the 26th, when Edward had “remained in arms on the battlefield”24 . There’s a real sense that Edward has moved somewhere after the battle, and it just so happens that the town of Crécy was just a short walk downhill from his position on the traditional site.
The fact that the rest of the army remained camped on the ridge where the battle took place was almost certainly much more relevant to Retford and the anonymous author of the Cleopatra Itinerary and, as Livingston agrees, the Forest of Crécy was seen as a geographic region rather than a specific body of woods by Northburgh, Retford and the Cleopatra Itinerary. Why wouldn’t they continue using that identifier until the whole of the army was beyond its nebulous bounds?
We can also turn this back on Livingston. The comforts of the Priory of Saint-Vast or the castle that was beside it were equally just a short walk downhill for Edward. Why wouldn’t Retford record Edward’s stay in Domvast if this was the closest village, as was Retford’s usual practice? It’s almost as though the field of battle and its general location were much more important and momentous than any small town or village could be.
Taken all together, we find that Edward had no reason to keep the whole of his army by the Somme until Vespers on the 25th and that the Kitchen Journal, the Cleopatra Itinerary and Michael Northburgh all attest to the English being “in” the forest, or on the other side of it, on the evening of the 25th, strongly suggesting that Edward was much closer to Crécy than Livingston believes. Finally, we have both Michael Northburgh putting Edward in Crécy on the night of the 27th and evidence that the “Forest of Crécy” was conceived of as a region rather than a specific body of woods that greatly extends the radius where one could still be considered “under” or “within” the forest.
One final point before I finish off this section. Livingston hangs a lot on the unimpeachable reliability of the Kitchen Journal. It’s a “powerfully important” source that he suggests might have been “ignored” because it was “boring”25 . It also “consistently placed the king within the closest town to his march”, so of course any time Edward is not mentioned as being near a town must mean he didn’t stay in one26 . But Livingston doesn’t actually regard the Kitchen Journal as totally reliable. Like most historians, he has dismissed the fact that it reports Edward as being lodged at Acheux-en-Vimeu on the 21st and 22nd of August, as well as the 23rd, instead putting Edward at Airaines on the 21st and 22nd27 . He offers no explanation why he rejects Retford’s account here, even in footnotes, and lies by omission in claiming the Kitchen Journal says that, on the 23rd, Edward ”now encamped at Acheux-en-Vimeu”28 .
I suspect that Livingston, disagreeing vehemently with Andrew Ayton and Clifford J. Rogers’ about the idea that Edward had intended to fight at Crécy from early in the campaign, decided that the fact that the Kitchen Journal is the sole source to place Edward and Acheux-en-Vimeu means it must be in error29 . Since, however, this would call into question how much he relies on the source in determining that Edward couldn’t possibly have reached Crécy in time, he simply pretends that all the sources are in accordance, knowing that 99.9% of his readership aren’t going to notice.
4 - What do the Chronicles Say?
Let’s start with Giovanni Villani. One of Livingston’s key contentions is that no chronicler mentions the English crossing anything that resembles the Maye, because Villani’s mention of them crossing a “narrow but deep stream” not only doesn’t sound like the Maye, but the English should be crossing by the bridge at Crécy rather than fording it30 . He suggests that it might be a “tributary running out of the Forest of Crécy and into the great marsh”.
The question is, what tributary? He uses Le Dien and the Rivière des Îles as examples of a tributary, but they’re to the west of Noyelles, Sailly Bray and Nouvion, which in turn are on the edge of the marsh he mentions. Are we to imagine that Edward billeted his troops behind these streams overnight, knowing that it would be slow to get them back over? That seems unlikely, but there also aren’t any tributaries along any path the English could take to Crécy for Livingston to point to.
And what importance does the bridge really hold? Contrary to what Livingston has said, 300 men weren’t sent to Hesdin after the English crossed the Blanchetaque, but rather arrangements were made on the 18th of August for Hesdin to be reinforced in the event that the English crossed the Blanchetaque31 . If Philippe is, on the 18th of August, making plans for what the English would do in six days' time, then why wouldn’t he also be having bridges broken down? That had been his strategy throughout the campaign, so why should we assume that he had abandoned the practice of destroying every non-fortified bridge in the English line of march?
Additionally, the available evidence suggests that the water table in the region was a metre higher in the 14th century, which means that even in drought the Maye could have been even deeper than it currently is32 .
Moving on from the stream in Villani’s account, Livingston provides the further objection that Villani places the battle “on a small hill between Crécy and Abbeville in Ponthieu”, which is definitely not near where the traditional site is33 . What he chose to ignore, however, is that Villani said that “ they pitched camp outside Crécy” just before mentioning the hill. “Fuori”, the word translated as “outside” does not really have the sense of distance that would allow the battle to be situated at Domvast. As an Italian, Villani most likely knew that the battle took place at Crécy and that Crécy was close to Abbeville, but did not have sufficient geographic knowledge of the region to avoid accidentally situating the battle on the wrong side of the village. He already displayed some minor confusion about the geography, for instance placing Amiens just 16.5 miles from the battle, and this is hardly an unheard of error for a chronicler34 .
Secondly, let’s address Henry Knighton. Knighton mentions the English coming “towards the bridge at Crécy”, and Livingston chides historians for assuming that he passed over it35 . But let’s check that translation.
The specific phrase that Knighton uses is “Et uenit [venit] ad pontem de Cressy”36 . For some strange reason the DMLBS doesn’t have an entry for “uenit/venit”, but I’m unaware of any reason why the classical meaning of the word (“came”) should be disregarded. In short, what Knighton actually says if you use the plain meaning of the word, is that the English “came to the bridge of Crécy”. And there, in our first two sources, we have both the stream and the bridge that Livingston claims are missing.
Let’s move on to the word “devant”, which Livingston translates as “before” in the sense of “on the way to Crécy” with regards to the Cleopatra Itinerary and Robert de Dreuex’s claims of lost horses37 . This is linguistic sleight of hand. “Devant” does indeed translate as “before”, but in the older sense of “in front of” and very, very, clearly does not mean anything like “on the way to” a place38 . A good piece of evidence, if anything more than the dictionary definition is needed, is how Edward uses it in his letter to Thomas Lucy. Edward wrote that he was “devant” Calais, and Livingston translates this as “at” Calais, so he clearly knows the correct use of the word39 .
And, just as Livingston has criticized scholars for thinking that “apud” can only mean “at” Crécy, most of the words he translates as “towards” or “near” or the like can just as easily be translated to support the traditional site. “Juxta” mostly has the sense of being very close to the place being referred to, “devers” can just as easily mean “beside” or “on the side of” a place, “usque” has a sense of “right up to” moreso than “towards” and, despite Livingston’s attempts to fuzz the issue, the traditional translation of “apud” as “at” is because any translation in the sense of “towards” is a very great stretch40 .
This throws several things into a new light. Take for instance the letter of Johann von Schönfeld, a German knight who served Edward at Crécy. He is no longer clearly saying that the battle was “between a certain diocese of St. George” - which Livingston plausibly identifies as Abbeville - and Crécy, because the “iuxta” that Livingston translates as “between” can just as easily (perhaps moreso) be translated as being “near a certain diocese of St. George and a town called Crécy”.
There are other tracks I could take, arguing that the sources which place the battle between Labroye and Crécy are more reliable than those placing it between Abbeville and Crécy, but I think the fact that Robert de Dreuex’s letter and the Cleopatra Itinerary’s completely unambiguous and unarguable placement of the battle in front of the village of Crécy, combined with Henry Knighton’s similarly clear and unambiguous reference to the English coming to the bridge at Crécy and Giovanni Villani mentioning a stream that can only have been the Maye provides a sufficient interpretive lens when translating the sources. The battle was fought in the traditional location and we can be certain of that because the sources tell us it was so.
5 - No Archaeological Evidence
Livingston’s claim of “repeated major archaeological investigations” of the battlefield at Crécy set off major alarm bells when I first read Crécy: Battle of Five Kings, because so far as I knew at the time there had only been one serious attempt at an archaeological investigation of the site, and Livingston didn’t provide any information on any others. Even more disturbing was his claim that multiple pre-1346 ferrous objects had been found, but had been dismissed by Sir Philip Preston.
Because, as it turns out, only one major archaeological survey has been done on the site since the early 19th century, and no pre-1346 ferrous items were found, although some Roman coins were discovered. The survey was organized and supervised by Sir Philip Preston in 1995, and involved using metal-detectors. I wouldn’t call it “extensive”, either, because it focused on a narrow area “immediately south and south-west of the existing viewing tower” due to both where Preston thought the battle had taken place and the need to work around existing crops. That particular area is, as Preston notes, now behind where he thinks the English had established their lines, and so it’s not surprising that nothing has turned up there yet41 .
I’m aware of only one other excavation in an area that might be associated with the Battle of Crécy, which was preventive archaeology that failed to turn up anything other than a machined horseshoe and some contemporary nails and seems to have been very limited in scope42 . Dr Helen Fenwick also led a team from the University of Hull in 2006 to examine the taluses/rideaux in an effort to determine if they were likely to have been present at the time of the battle, with no firm conclusion reached beyond that it was very plausible they were natural43 . This is the sum total of the archaeological exploration of the battlefield I’ve been able to find, and I’m pretty sure that you’ll agree that none of them have been particularly major.
Now, interestingly, while Livingston uses a lack of archaeological evidence to argue against the traditional locations of Crécy in this book and Agincourt in his most recent work, he doesn’t apply the same standard of proof for his version of Agincourt. I’ve overlaid, to the best of my very limited abilities, the finds from Tim Sutherland’s 2006 survey of the site with Livingston’s reconstruction, and you’ll note that some of the finds (and hence the survey) were right in front of the English archers44 . This is despite his insistence on the French cavalry reaching and impaling their horses on the English stakes, which Livingston stresses, and the inevitable stripping of the dead multiplying the available artifacts according to him45 . Despite the limited scope of the survey (which was much more limited than the artifact find map suggests), there should still have been some finds according to Livingston’s understanding of battlefield archaeology46 .
While, yes, there should be some archaeological finds on a medieval battlefield, especially of non-ferrous materials, things are slightly more complex than Livingston suggests. For instance, the far more extensive survey of the Towton battlefield shows us that artifacts are rare in the rear of the victorious army, with some large areas completely devoid of them, and that they tend to extend back in the direction the defeated army fled in47 . The existing, very limited, survey of Crécy focused on an area where the English were in control and, as a result, it’s entirely plausible for there to be no archaeological finds there.
With regards to the “proliferation of artifacts”, rather than a lack of them, that results from the stripping of the dead, Livingston cites Blood Red Roses, but fails to give any page number or even chapter title as his source48 . I assume he’s citing Tim Sutherland’s chapter on the archaeology of the site but, funnily enough, Sutherland doesn’t suggest that the act of stripping bodies increases the number of artifacts to find. He suggests instead that the act of stripping the dead was, on the whole, successful and that we’re lucky to have the artifacts from the site that we do49 . When only a couple of thousand artifacts have been found in a location where hundreds of thousands of arrows were shot and thousands, perhaps even tens of thousands, of men were killed, it’s perhaps not entirely surprising to not find even a small number of 14th century artifacts outside of where the fighting was actually conducted.
6 - Traditions Can be Invented
Now, of course, traditions can be invented, but how far back do you need to go before it becomes an actual tradition rather than a cheap trick to lure the tourists in? David Friasson, in his 2022 book on the battle, points out a mid-18th century source from before the publication of the Cassini map that claims an established local tradition of the battle being on the traditional site50 . Of course, this source also mentions the maps of Guillaume Delisle, and so Livingston might suspect that any local tradition comes from Delisle’s map rather than Cassini and that Delisle simply guessed the location51 .
Guillaume Delisle lists at least one of his sources and the anonymous author of the 1757 work refers to local traditions of the battle that include finding horseshoes, spearheads and 14th century coins near the Maye, so it doesn't seem likely Delisle invented any traditions52 . Let’s go back another hundred years to Jacques Sanson. Here we find, yet again, a local tradition of the battle being fought between Crécy and Wadicourt, before any maps showing the location of the battle have been published and written by someone who lived in Abbeville53 . Published a year before that we have the Topographia Galliae by Martin Zeiller, where we also have the traditional site being identified54 .Go back another hundred years, and we have François de Belleforest and Nicolas Vignier both adhering to tradition55 . And, as Section 4 proved, if you go back to 1346 we have the Cleopatra Itinerary and Robert de Dreuex putting the battle in the traditional spot.
So, yes, while it’s entirely possible some of the topographical names of fields or areas of the traditional site are later inventions for the consumption of rich young Englishmen, we have very clear evidence of the traditional battle site being considered the site of the battle going back to the battle itself, including by later local writers.
7 - Doubts about the Tradition
Now we come to the “straw man” section of Livingston’s arguments. If you don’t remember the map of the serpentine maneuver Livingston believes his opponents adhere to, click here. I won’t say it’s entirely an invention - Matthew Strickland and Robert Hardy both make this argument in The Great Warbow56 - but this is not the argument of Michael Prestwich, Sir Philip Preston or Andrew Ayton in the only book Livingston cites as evidence of this foolish view.
Prestwich, in his chapter of the book, makes it clear that he views the battle in the “gentle bowl formed at one end of the Vallée des Clercs”, that the English men-at-arms were drawn up in three battles, one behind the other, and that the English lines were perhaps 1000 yards long, heavily protected by rideaux and carts57 . To help people visualize it, here’s a rough sketch I made using a LIDAR map, cadastral maps and Prestwich’s description. As you can, see, the French would not need to make a serpentine maneuver to fight the English. Prestwich is right that, on passing the large embankment they’d need to “wheel to face” the English, but this is a normal forming of a column into a line and could easily take place in the ~300 metre wide space outside of Prestwich’s 300 yard maximum range for the English bows.
While Sir Philip Preston does, in his chapter on the traditional battlefield, suggest that English archery might reach as far as the gap between the eastern bank and the Maye, this seems to be an early view that changed by the time the book was completed58 . The final chapter of the book, taking into consideration the work that had been conducted over the course of putting it together, was co-authored by Andrew Ayton and Sir Philip Preston and contains a version of the battle that expands on Prestwich's59 .
As with Prestwich, their view is that the main focus of the battle was against the vanguard, positioned in the “crescent-shaped position” immediately before the windmill, but they instead have the main battle covering more of the ridge towards Wadicourt and the rearguard in reserve. Here is an approximate representation of their version of the English deployment.
They do mention the French advancing up the valley to attack the English, but only in the context of this happening after the French had failed to defeat the English vanguard and the bodies of horses and men made it necessary to try elsewhere along the line. In their scenario, the relatively small space for the French to enter the valley and the limited vision of what was happening ahead, meant that those men-at-arms trailing behind the French vanguard could not see what was happening ahead and pressed forwards. This prevented retreat by, for instance, the Genoese and meant that anyone attempting to flee would need to do so up the valley, where there was room to escape60 .
There’s not space here to fully reconstruct the battle beyond showing that Ayton, Preston and Prestwich do not, in fact, argue for a serpentine maneuver as DeVries and Livingston claim, but I will discuss why the French might have attacked despite the English holding such an advantageous position.
The French or French-allied sources are almost universal in contending that Philippe ordered the attack, with Jean le Bel and Froissart being almost the sole exceptions to the rule61 . These sources suggest that this was “against the will of valiant men who knew war”, to quote the Chronicle of Saint-Omer, so why did Philippe order it? Contrary to Livingston, those who believe Philippe ordered the attack don’t think he did it because he was stupid. No, they think he was desperate to finally get to grips with Edward.
Philippe had failed to bring Edward to battle in 1339, 1340, 1342 and twice in 1346 (when Edward tricked him and was able to cross the Seine and then at the Blanchetaque). Philippe’s political capital was used up; if Edward managed to escape yet again, the whispers about Philippe’s “renardie” (foxiness) that had dogged him since 1339 might become shouts. More to the point, being tricked by Edward at the Seine had likely deeply humiliated Philippe and made him desperate to recover his honour. Could he really afford to risk Edward somehow slipping the noose62 ? While it may have been a bad idea militarily, it seems entirely plausible that Philippe considered the political cost of yet another failure to fight the English if they escaped just too high to risk.
Conclusion
As I hope I’ve demonstrated, there’s an awful lot of bad history in Crécy: Battle of Five Kings. Livingston relies heavily on distorting the names and locations of fields on cadastral maps, manipulates the location of a windmill, deliberately mistranslates “devant” via linguistic sleight of hand, invents strawmen to argue against, lies about the archaeological situation and outright ignores primary sources when they contradict his version of events. The only way the site he and Kelly DeVries have claimed as the “true” location of the Battle of Crécy can possibly work is if you ignore a substantial amount of evidence against it and if you assume Philippe - otherwise brilliant in their account - was suddenly incredibly stupid in how he attacked the English.
If you’ve enjoyed this, then I’ll be posting another post with several appendices after these two posts have had their day in the sun, including a more full reconstruction of the battle (as I see it), a note on the paths through the Forest of Crécy (including evidence that they were adequate for an army in 1346) and various minor points I didn’t add either for lack of space or because I didn’t want to redo 40 endnotes.
submitted by Hergrim to badhistory [link] [comments]
To read the first part of this series, a summary of Livingston’s arguments, click here.
As with the first post, many thanks to u/Valkine for giving feedback on these posts.
As I mentioned in the first post, I began to have doubts about the exact location DeVries and Livingston originally proposed in 2015. If you look on a map, you’ll see that the road from Abbeville to Hesdin leads through the spot where Livingston and DeVries situated Edward’s army. Their reasoning was that Phillipe didn’t want to follow Edward, but instead get ahead of him and so went via Saint-Riquier, where a substantial part of his army was quartered, and from there went west as his scouts had told him Edward hadn’t yet crossed the Maye, coming up the slope from Domvast and into battle1 .
After reflection, this didn’t really sit well with me. Why go to all that trouble, and travel all that distance, when you could simply head him off near Canchy, completely blocking Edward’s path unless he wanted to risk going through a forest knowing he had an enemy would could race ahead of him or go west towards the marshes in the hope of crossing the Authie at a smoldering Rue, having an enemy hot on his heels? I tried to come up with various alternatives but, in hindsight, none of them would be as suitable as their proposed site for a final stand.
Livingston’s modified itinerary and account of Philippe’s journey in Crécy: Battle of Five Kings suggests he was asked or asked himself about some of the points I had doubts about, and he came up with an alternative that we’ve already seen originally, which had Philippe trying to head Edward off from the river Authie, before swinging back down on finding Edward static above Domvast. As with my initial doubts, this route didn’t make much sense for me, although for different reasons as I’ll get into down below.
First, though, let’s take a look at the site Livingston and DeVries have proposed.
Part 2: Arguments For Tradition
1 - The New Location
If you haven’t already seen the maps of the proposed new location, quickly go back to the first post and get them up, because I want you to compare them to the map I’ve made.
My Map
You may notice a few differences from Livingston and DeVries’ maps. The only important changes are that there’s no place called the Jardin de Genève, only one called au Jardin de Genève, and the windmill is no longer within the wagenburg. Why, you ask? The first is because of 3P1332/7 of the Somme Archives, otherwise known as the 1832 cadastral map of an area known as the Chemin des Chauffours2 , while the second is due to the 1757 Cassini map.
Let’s start with the Cassini map.
The mill depicted - an oil mill, not a flour mill - didn’t exist in 1832, when the cadastral maps were made, and left no certain impression on field names3 . I’ve also not been able to locate any other source that might identify its location. The Cassini map, however, should be good enough to demonstrate that it was not between the Bois de But and the Forêt de Crécy. While it’s not 100% in locating things, it is accurate in relative terms. That’s to say, any given town or windmill might be hundreds of metres or even a kilometre or so from where it would be on modern maps, the relative position between windmills and their towns is broadly accurate to what the 19th century cadastral maps show. The mill might not be exactly between the Bois de But and Notre-Dame-De-Foy, but it will still be between them.
This is the first bit of badhistory, because I cannot see how, in good faith, you can place a mill where Livingston and DeVries have. I’d say that the ball is firmly in their court to prove that it could be there and, as the surrounding villages have their own, closer, mills, that the oil mill is medieval.
The second point we need to address is the fields known as au Jardin de Genève. I suspect that Livingston and DeVries have here decided that, because the fields are close by the bowl in the ground where they believe the Genoese died, that bowl must have been known as the Jardin de Genève. However, there’s no evidence for this beyond deductive reasoning and, what’s more, those fields labeled au Jardin de Genève extend all the way to the Chemin Des Maillets. That is, those fields go into and up out of the bowl. If the name applies to all of them, or even to the whole length of the long field the name mostly covers, then the bowl cannot be the Jardin de Genève because it is already au Jardin de Genève.
I’m not going to deny here that Genève couldn’t refer to the Genoese. Livingston should have referred to a document that had a phrase like “des galées de Gênes” to make his point rather than a dictionary reference that doesn’t really show the variations in spelling that could occur, but his point still stands4 . However, the question about how we can know that the name refers to an area where the Genoese died remains. Why does it sound like an 18th century aristocrat once tried to grow some plants from Geneva (aka Genève) near the fields, rather than that the field was near a bloody catastrophe? It also doesn't discount the possibility that junipers were indeed once grown near the fields. It's a linguistic possibility, and their absence in the modern landscape doesn't prove their absence in earlier periods.
Moving on, let’s also consider where the place in the English formation Livingston has Philippe attacking. You might not be able to see it clearly in my screenshotted map, but Livingston has carts between the Bois de But and the gap where the English vanguard is. Right in the middle of this is where he places the Jardin de Genève and the potential ditch that may have later been turned into a phosphate mine. The slope is not impassible, but is definitely quite steep.
Do you see a problem?
“No man is a fool”. Why, why would Philippe send the Genoese up against this position and follow up with cavalry behind them? Even if the Genoese were able to completely drive the English archers behind their barricade of wagons and keep them there, are the French men-at-arms supposed to charge up that steep slope on their expensive horses and, having lost their momentum, somehow push a gap through the carts?
Compare this with the left wing of the English, which is on far flatter terrain and where it would be easier to overcome by infantry assault than the English right, or the open gap between the wagons? If Philippe was no fool and wanted to break into the English enclosure with his cavalry, then why not use his Genoese to soften up the English vanguard and then charge through with his own vanguard? Or, with the urban militias coming up behind the Genoese, why not position them behind the Genoese so that they could advance and clear the wagons in hand-to-hand fighting? The only way committing the Genoese to fight on such unfavorable ground and using his mounted men-at-arms against such an unsuitable target makes sense is if Philippe had already lost control of his army - or was afraid he was about to - but Livingston gives little, if any, hint that he subscribes to this idea.
I’m not sure if this is “bad history” so much as it is “bad historiography”. Having established a key interpretive principle, Livingston goes on to ignore it because proper application would seriously harm his case. “Stupid happens”, as he says, but if stupid happens then an author should say they think it happened, and perhaps even why they think it happened, instead of trying to cast it in a positive light5 .
2 - King Philippe’s Plan
Next up is Philippe’s plan. Livingston contends that Philippe intended to get ahead of the English before they reached the Authie, and that’s why he left so early on the morning of the 26th and why he marched through Saint-Riquier and towards Labroye before cutting back to the new site. This, he suggests, explains the sources mentioning Philippe going through Labroye and matches with some sources that clearly say he left very early.
And several sources do say he left early. The Chronicle of Artois and the related Chronicle of Saint-Omer both agree that Philippe left the town “when he was to hear his mass”, which would be about sunrise, while Gilles le Muisit gives an impression of great haste on Philippe’s part, writing that he followed Edward with “a burning desire” and progressed “hastily” in that pursuit6 .
Several sources also say that Philippe went to a town or place called “La Braie” or “Labroie”. The Grandes Chroniques says that Philippe passed through a town called “La Braye” that was “beside the forest of Crécy” on his way to meet Edward, the Citizen of Valenciennes wrote that Edward went across “La Braie” and “Crécy” while the trailing Philippe to “La Braie” and set up camp there7 . But is that actually enough to establish Philippe’s route?
If we go back to the chronicles of Artois and Saint Omer, it’s interesting to note that their accounts have Philippe leaving early, but “without array and with few men” and without any of his lords or allies. When someone finally approached him about this, Philippe agreed to stop and then “assembled all of his army”, putting the Genoese in front8 . These accounts, then, build in a delay while the rest of Philippe’s army catches up and is put into some sort of order. Gilles le Muisit, although he doesn’t mention any pause, does have the Genoese with Phillipe even though the “greater part” of the army - including the cavalry - followed on behind9 .
And then there’s the matter of Labroie/Labraie. It’s easy to identify the “La Braie” that relates to Edward as the marshy region that he passed by after crossing the Somme, but Philippe’s journey as plotted out by Livingston doesn’t come close to either the town of Labroye or any noticeably marshy areas10 . Although he doesn’t say it outright, I suspect Livingston’s response would be that the chroniclers just got confused by Philippe initially heading towards Labroye and then retreating to it, and so had him visit it twice, but there’s a much simpler answer.
Jacques Sanson, a 17th century antiquarian who lived in Abbeville examined the Battle fo Crécy in some depth for his book L'Histoire Genealogique Des Comtes De Pontieu, Et Maieurs D'Abbeville. He used, in addition to the standard B/C version of Froissart and Giovanni Villani, the Accounts of a Citizen of Valenciennes and the so-called “Tramecourt” manuscript, as well as what seems to be some local traditions11 . Among what I thought were local traditions were king Philippe being between Le Titre and Forest l’Abbaye, heading towards Nouvion, when he heard of where the English were. Then it struck me: what if Sanson was not using a local tradition, but working with the term Labraie/Labroie and thinking about how non-Picards might render “l’Abbaye”?
So, I did some digging. And there, in the Napoleonic cadastral map for Neuilly-L'hopital, I hit the jackpot. Because, although the woods there were labeled Le Bois de L’Hopital, one of the roads passing it was named Chemin du Bois de Labbroye and a field next to the forest is named au bout de Bois de Labbroye. The assembly table makes it clear that “Labbroye” is a version of “l’Abbaye”12 . It actually doesn’t matter whether Philippe went as far as Forest l’Abbaye before realising where Edward was or if he was passing the woods of “Labbroye” at Neuilly-L'hopital, because it offers an explanation of how Philippe could pass through “La Braye” while following the English, which Livingston’s version doesn’t.
Philippe’s plan, then, appears not to have been to get in front of the English, but a rapid pursuit that forced them to fight. The many chronicles referencing Philippe following the English only serve to reinforce this13 . While he was certainly eager to fight and may have left early, the available evidence we have as a whole indicates that he was following behind the English and at one point may have had to pause his pursuit to wait for his army to actually get out of camp and follow him.
*3 - Scheduling Conflicts *
A key part of Livingston’s theory is that, because of how he interprets the English movements, it’s impossible for the English to have arrived at the traditional location in time to set up and prepare for an attack by the French. There are two parts to this: Edward’s letter of the 3rd of September, which states that the English waited at the Blanchetaque until Vespers (6pm) on the 25th, and William Retford’s Kitchen Journal, which says that the English were “in the forest of Crécy” on the 25th14 .
While the Kitchen Journal is difficult to interpret, Edward’s letter is quite unequivocal on the matter:
“our adversary appeared on the other bank…For this reason we waited like this the whole day and the next, until the hour of Vespers.”15
The question is, how literally should we take Edward. That is, should we take it as a given that the entire English army camped near the Blanchetaque, waiting in case the French tried to cross, or should we instead suggest that a token force was left to watch the ford in case the French tried the dangerous crossing against all military reason16 ?
Other sources provide some insight. Michael Northburgh, the king’s secretary, has the English staying by the river on the night of the 24rd and moving off on the 25th to camp “in” the Forest of Crécy and, while he doesn’t give any dates of movement, Richard Wynkeley suggests that Philippe didn’t even arrive at the Blanchetaque and that most of his army may not even arrived17 . Jean le Bel, whose informant was Jean de Beaumont (an advisor to Philippe), agrees with Wynkeley that Philippe and much of his army never made it to the Blanchetaque, and the Grandes Chroniques, a royal annal, puts Philippe in Abbeville all day on the 25th strengthening the decrepit bridge so the army could cross and celebrating the feast of Saint Louis18 .
If there was no significant French force opposite the English on the Somme, as reliable English and French sources attest, then why would Edward remain at the ford with his whole army until evening on the day after he crossed, especially as Livingston reminds us repeatedly how hard opposed “wet-gap” crossings are19 ? There is some merit to the argument that he needed to wait for the parties who had gone to Le Crotoy and who had chased the defeated French, but would he really have waited a full day before moving, knowing how desperate the situation was?
Going back to the Kitchen Journal, Livingston uses it to bolster his arguments by interpreting it through the lens of Edward’s letter. On the 24th, the English are listed as being “beneath the Forest of Crécy”, then on the 25th they are “in the Forest of Crécy”, on the 26th it goes back to the English being “still beneath the Forest of Crécy” and the English are “in the field beneath the Forest of Crécy” on the 27th20 . Since Northburgh helps establish that the English could be camped along the Somme and yet still be “in the Forest of Crécy”, Livingston concludes that the “Forest of Crécy” was not so much a distinct wood for the English, but a region that included various minor woods21 . His logic is that, with Edward establishing the English didn’t leave the Somme until evening on the 25th, references in the Cleopatra Itinerary to the English being on “another side of the Forest of Crécy” and in Northburgh and the Kitchen Journal to the English being “in” the forest on the 25th must merely have meant they were under the eaves of the woods22 .
If you’re thinking to yourself “gee, Hergrim’s already demonstrated that it’s unlikely Edward would think the French were going to try crossing the Somme and Livingston accepts that the Forest of Crécy was probably thought of as a geographic region, so why couldn’t the ‘Forest of Crécy’ include the land above the town, which had a forest behind it?”, then Livingston has pre-empted you. The Kitchen Journal and the Cleopatra Itinerary both say that the army was on the fields “beneath” the Forest of Crécy on the 27th, and why would they say that if the battle really was fought in the traditional location. Wouldn’t it make sense for Edward to stay in comfort at the castle of Crécy or at least one of the houses there23 ?
Sadly for Livingston, we also have Michael Northburgh’s letter. He says, and I quote Livingston’s own translation here, that on the 27th Edward “encamped at Crécy”. Not in the forest, and distinct from the night of the 26th, when Edward had “remained in arms on the battlefield”24 . There’s a real sense that Edward has moved somewhere after the battle, and it just so happens that the town of Crécy was just a short walk downhill from his position on the traditional site.
The fact that the rest of the army remained camped on the ridge where the battle took place was almost certainly much more relevant to Retford and the anonymous author of the Cleopatra Itinerary and, as Livingston agrees, the Forest of Crécy was seen as a geographic region rather than a specific body of woods by Northburgh, Retford and the Cleopatra Itinerary. Why wouldn’t they continue using that identifier until the whole of the army was beyond its nebulous bounds?
We can also turn this back on Livingston. The comforts of the Priory of Saint-Vast or the castle that was beside it were equally just a short walk downhill for Edward. Why wouldn’t Retford record Edward’s stay in Domvast if this was the closest village, as was Retford’s usual practice? It’s almost as though the field of battle and its general location were much more important and momentous than any small town or village could be.
Taken all together, we find that Edward had no reason to keep the whole of his army by the Somme until Vespers on the 25th and that the Kitchen Journal, the Cleopatra Itinerary and Michael Northburgh all attest to the English being “in” the forest, or on the other side of it, on the evening of the 25th, strongly suggesting that Edward was much closer to Crécy than Livingston believes. Finally, we have both Michael Northburgh putting Edward in Crécy on the night of the 27th and evidence that the “Forest of Crécy” was conceived of as a region rather than a specific body of woods that greatly extends the radius where one could still be considered “under” or “within” the forest.
One final point before I finish off this section. Livingston hangs a lot on the unimpeachable reliability of the Kitchen Journal. It’s a “powerfully important” source that he suggests might have been “ignored” because it was “boring”25 . It also “consistently placed the king within the closest town to his march”, so of course any time Edward is not mentioned as being near a town must mean he didn’t stay in one26 . But Livingston doesn’t actually regard the Kitchen Journal as totally reliable. Like most historians, he has dismissed the fact that it reports Edward as being lodged at Acheux-en-Vimeu on the 21st and 22nd of August, as well as the 23rd, instead putting Edward at Airaines on the 21st and 22nd27 . He offers no explanation why he rejects Retford’s account here, even in footnotes, and lies by omission in claiming the Kitchen Journal says that, on the 23rd, Edward ”now encamped at Acheux-en-Vimeu”28 .
I suspect that Livingston, disagreeing vehemently with Andrew Ayton and Clifford J. Rogers’ about the idea that Edward had intended to fight at Crécy from early in the campaign, decided that the fact that the Kitchen Journal is the sole source to place Edward and Acheux-en-Vimeu means it must be in error29 . Since, however, this would call into question how much he relies on the source in determining that Edward couldn’t possibly have reached Crécy in time, he simply pretends that all the sources are in accordance, knowing that 99.9% of his readership aren’t going to notice.
4 - What do the Chronicles Say?
Let’s start with Giovanni Villani. One of Livingston’s key contentions is that no chronicler mentions the English crossing anything that resembles the Maye, because Villani’s mention of them crossing a “narrow but deep stream” not only doesn’t sound like the Maye, but the English should be crossing by the bridge at Crécy rather than fording it30 . He suggests that it might be a “tributary running out of the Forest of Crécy and into the great marsh”.
The question is, what tributary? He uses Le Dien and the Rivière des Îles as examples of a tributary, but they’re to the west of Noyelles, Sailly Bray and Nouvion, which in turn are on the edge of the marsh he mentions. Are we to imagine that Edward billeted his troops behind these streams overnight, knowing that it would be slow to get them back over? That seems unlikely, but there also aren’t any tributaries along any path the English could take to Crécy for Livingston to point to.
And what importance does the bridge really hold? Contrary to what Livingston has said, 300 men weren’t sent to Hesdin after the English crossed the Blanchetaque, but rather arrangements were made on the 18th of August for Hesdin to be reinforced in the event that the English crossed the Blanchetaque31 . If Philippe is, on the 18th of August, making plans for what the English would do in six days' time, then why wouldn’t he also be having bridges broken down? That had been his strategy throughout the campaign, so why should we assume that he had abandoned the practice of destroying every non-fortified bridge in the English line of march?
Additionally, the available evidence suggests that the water table in the region was a metre higher in the 14th century, which means that even in drought the Maye could have been even deeper than it currently is32 .
Moving on from the stream in Villani’s account, Livingston provides the further objection that Villani places the battle “on a small hill between Crécy and Abbeville in Ponthieu”, which is definitely not near where the traditional site is33 . What he chose to ignore, however, is that Villani said that “ they pitched camp outside Crécy” just before mentioning the hill. “Fuori”, the word translated as “outside” does not really have the sense of distance that would allow the battle to be situated at Domvast. As an Italian, Villani most likely knew that the battle took place at Crécy and that Crécy was close to Abbeville, but did not have sufficient geographic knowledge of the region to avoid accidentally situating the battle on the wrong side of the village. He already displayed some minor confusion about the geography, for instance placing Amiens just 16.5 miles from the battle, and this is hardly an unheard of error for a chronicler34 .
Secondly, let’s address Henry Knighton. Knighton mentions the English coming “towards the bridge at Crécy”, and Livingston chides historians for assuming that he passed over it35 . But let’s check that translation.
The specific phrase that Knighton uses is “Et uenit [venit] ad pontem de Cressy”36 . For some strange reason the DMLBS doesn’t have an entry for “uenit/venit”, but I’m unaware of any reason why the classical meaning of the word (“came”) should be disregarded. In short, what Knighton actually says if you use the plain meaning of the word, is that the English “came to the bridge of Crécy”. And there, in our first two sources, we have both the stream and the bridge that Livingston claims are missing.
Let’s move on to the word “devant”, which Livingston translates as “before” in the sense of “on the way to Crécy” with regards to the Cleopatra Itinerary and Robert de Dreuex’s claims of lost horses37 . This is linguistic sleight of hand. “Devant” does indeed translate as “before”, but in the older sense of “in front of” and very, very, clearly does not mean anything like “on the way to” a place38 . A good piece of evidence, if anything more than the dictionary definition is needed, is how Edward uses it in his letter to Thomas Lucy. Edward wrote that he was “devant” Calais, and Livingston translates this as “at” Calais, so he clearly knows the correct use of the word39 .
And, just as Livingston has criticized scholars for thinking that “apud” can only mean “at” Crécy, most of the words he translates as “towards” or “near” or the like can just as easily be translated to support the traditional site. “Juxta” mostly has the sense of being very close to the place being referred to, “devers” can just as easily mean “beside” or “on the side of” a place, “usque” has a sense of “right up to” moreso than “towards” and, despite Livingston’s attempts to fuzz the issue, the traditional translation of “apud” as “at” is because any translation in the sense of “towards” is a very great stretch40 .
This throws several things into a new light. Take for instance the letter of Johann von Schönfeld, a German knight who served Edward at Crécy. He is no longer clearly saying that the battle was “between a certain diocese of St. George” - which Livingston plausibly identifies as Abbeville - and Crécy, because the “iuxta” that Livingston translates as “between” can just as easily (perhaps moreso) be translated as being “near a certain diocese of St. George and a town called Crécy”.
There are other tracks I could take, arguing that the sources which place the battle between Labroye and Crécy are more reliable than those placing it between Abbeville and Crécy, but I think the fact that Robert de Dreuex’s letter and the Cleopatra Itinerary’s completely unambiguous and unarguable placement of the battle in front of the village of Crécy, combined with Henry Knighton’s similarly clear and unambiguous reference to the English coming to the bridge at Crécy and Giovanni Villani mentioning a stream that can only have been the Maye provides a sufficient interpretive lens when translating the sources. The battle was fought in the traditional location and we can be certain of that because the sources tell us it was so.
5 - No Archaeological Evidence
Livingston’s claim of “repeated major archaeological investigations” of the battlefield at Crécy set off major alarm bells when I first read Crécy: Battle of Five Kings, because so far as I knew at the time there had only been one serious attempt at an archaeological investigation of the site, and Livingston didn’t provide any information on any others. Even more disturbing was his claim that multiple pre-1346 ferrous objects had been found, but had been dismissed by Sir Philip Preston.
Because, as it turns out, only one major archaeological survey has been done on the site since the early 19th century, and no pre-1346 ferrous items were found, although some Roman coins were discovered. The survey was organized and supervised by Sir Philip Preston in 1995, and involved using metal-detectors. I wouldn’t call it “extensive”, either, because it focused on a narrow area “immediately south and south-west of the existing viewing tower” due to both where Preston thought the battle had taken place and the need to work around existing crops. That particular area is, as Preston notes, now behind where he thinks the English had established their lines, and so it’s not surprising that nothing has turned up there yet41 .
I’m aware of only one other excavation in an area that might be associated with the Battle of Crécy, which was preventive archaeology that failed to turn up anything other than a machined horseshoe and some contemporary nails and seems to have been very limited in scope42 . Dr Helen Fenwick also led a team from the University of Hull in 2006 to examine the taluses/rideaux in an effort to determine if they were likely to have been present at the time of the battle, with no firm conclusion reached beyond that it was very plausible they were natural43 . This is the sum total of the archaeological exploration of the battlefield I’ve been able to find, and I’m pretty sure that you’ll agree that none of them have been particularly major.
Now, interestingly, while Livingston uses a lack of archaeological evidence to argue against the traditional locations of Crécy in this book and Agincourt in his most recent work, he doesn’t apply the same standard of proof for his version of Agincourt. I’ve overlaid, to the best of my very limited abilities, the finds from Tim Sutherland’s 2006 survey of the site with Livingston’s reconstruction, and you’ll note that some of the finds (and hence the survey) were right in front of the English archers44 . This is despite his insistence on the French cavalry reaching and impaling their horses on the English stakes, which Livingston stresses, and the inevitable stripping of the dead multiplying the available artifacts according to him45 . Despite the limited scope of the survey (which was much more limited than the artifact find map suggests), there should still have been some finds according to Livingston’s understanding of battlefield archaeology46 .
While, yes, there should be some archaeological finds on a medieval battlefield, especially of non-ferrous materials, things are slightly more complex than Livingston suggests. For instance, the far more extensive survey of the Towton battlefield shows us that artifacts are rare in the rear of the victorious army, with some large areas completely devoid of them, and that they tend to extend back in the direction the defeated army fled in47 . The existing, very limited, survey of Crécy focused on an area where the English were in control and, as a result, it’s entirely plausible for there to be no archaeological finds there.
With regards to the “proliferation of artifacts”, rather than a lack of them, that results from the stripping of the dead, Livingston cites Blood Red Roses, but fails to give any page number or even chapter title as his source48 . I assume he’s citing Tim Sutherland’s chapter on the archaeology of the site but, funnily enough, Sutherland doesn’t suggest that the act of stripping bodies increases the number of artifacts to find. He suggests instead that the act of stripping the dead was, on the whole, successful and that we’re lucky to have the artifacts from the site that we do49 . When only a couple of thousand artifacts have been found in a location where hundreds of thousands of arrows were shot and thousands, perhaps even tens of thousands, of men were killed, it’s perhaps not entirely surprising to not find even a small number of 14th century artifacts outside of where the fighting was actually conducted.
6 - Traditions Can be Invented
Now, of course, traditions can be invented, but how far back do you need to go before it becomes an actual tradition rather than a cheap trick to lure the tourists in? David Friasson, in his 2022 book on the battle, points out a mid-18th century source from before the publication of the Cassini map that claims an established local tradition of the battle being on the traditional site50 . Of course, this source also mentions the maps of Guillaume Delisle, and so Livingston might suspect that any local tradition comes from Delisle’s map rather than Cassini and that Delisle simply guessed the location51 .
Guillaume Delisle lists at least one of his sources and the anonymous author of the 1757 work refers to local traditions of the battle that include finding horseshoes, spearheads and 14th century coins near the Maye, so it doesn't seem likely Delisle invented any traditions52 . Let’s go back another hundred years to Jacques Sanson. Here we find, yet again, a local tradition of the battle being fought between Crécy and Wadicourt, before any maps showing the location of the battle have been published and written by someone who lived in Abbeville53 . Published a year before that we have the Topographia Galliae by Martin Zeiller, where we also have the traditional site being identified54 .Go back another hundred years, and we have François de Belleforest and Nicolas Vignier both adhering to tradition55 . And, as Section 4 proved, if you go back to 1346 we have the Cleopatra Itinerary and Robert de Dreuex putting the battle in the traditional spot.
So, yes, while it’s entirely possible some of the topographical names of fields or areas of the traditional site are later inventions for the consumption of rich young Englishmen, we have very clear evidence of the traditional battle site being considered the site of the battle going back to the battle itself, including by later local writers.
7 - Doubts about the Tradition
Now we come to the “straw man” section of Livingston’s arguments. If you don’t remember the map of the serpentine maneuver Livingston believes his opponents adhere to, click here. I won’t say it’s entirely an invention - Matthew Strickland and Robert Hardy both make this argument in The Great Warbow56 - but this is not the argument of Michael Prestwich, Sir Philip Preston or Andrew Ayton in the only book Livingston cites as evidence of this foolish view.
Prestwich, in his chapter of the book, makes it clear that he views the battle in the “gentle bowl formed at one end of the Vallée des Clercs”, that the English men-at-arms were drawn up in three battles, one behind the other, and that the English lines were perhaps 1000 yards long, heavily protected by rideaux and carts57 . To help people visualize it, here’s a rough sketch I made using a LIDAR map, cadastral maps and Prestwich’s description. As you can, see, the French would not need to make a serpentine maneuver to fight the English. Prestwich is right that, on passing the large embankment they’d need to “wheel to face” the English, but this is a normal forming of a column into a line and could easily take place in the ~300 metre wide space outside of Prestwich’s 300 yard maximum range for the English bows.
While Sir Philip Preston does, in his chapter on the traditional battlefield, suggest that English archery might reach as far as the gap between the eastern bank and the Maye, this seems to be an early view that changed by the time the book was completed58 . The final chapter of the book, taking into consideration the work that had been conducted over the course of putting it together, was co-authored by Andrew Ayton and Sir Philip Preston and contains a version of the battle that expands on Prestwich's59 .
As with Prestwich, their view is that the main focus of the battle was against the vanguard, positioned in the “crescent-shaped position” immediately before the windmill, but they instead have the main battle covering more of the ridge towards Wadicourt and the rearguard in reserve. Here is an approximate representation of their version of the English deployment.
They do mention the French advancing up the valley to attack the English, but only in the context of this happening after the French had failed to defeat the English vanguard and the bodies of horses and men made it necessary to try elsewhere along the line. In their scenario, the relatively small space for the French to enter the valley and the limited vision of what was happening ahead, meant that those men-at-arms trailing behind the French vanguard could not see what was happening ahead and pressed forwards. This prevented retreat by, for instance, the Genoese and meant that anyone attempting to flee would need to do so up the valley, where there was room to escape60 .
There’s not space here to fully reconstruct the battle beyond showing that Ayton, Preston and Prestwich do not, in fact, argue for a serpentine maneuver as DeVries and Livingston claim, but I will discuss why the French might have attacked despite the English holding such an advantageous position.
The French or French-allied sources are almost universal in contending that Philippe ordered the attack, with Jean le Bel and Froissart being almost the sole exceptions to the rule61 . These sources suggest that this was “against the will of valiant men who knew war”, to quote the Chronicle of Saint-Omer, so why did Philippe order it? Contrary to Livingston, those who believe Philippe ordered the attack don’t think he did it because he was stupid. No, they think he was desperate to finally get to grips with Edward.
Philippe had failed to bring Edward to battle in 1339, 1340, 1342 and twice in 1346 (when Edward tricked him and was able to cross the Seine and then at the Blanchetaque). Philippe’s political capital was used up; if Edward managed to escape yet again, the whispers about Philippe’s “renardie” (foxiness) that had dogged him since 1339 might become shouts. More to the point, being tricked by Edward at the Seine had likely deeply humiliated Philippe and made him desperate to recover his honour. Could he really afford to risk Edward somehow slipping the noose62 ? While it may have been a bad idea militarily, it seems entirely plausible that Philippe considered the political cost of yet another failure to fight the English if they escaped just too high to risk.
Conclusion
As I hope I’ve demonstrated, there’s an awful lot of bad history in Crécy: Battle of Five Kings. Livingston relies heavily on distorting the names and locations of fields on cadastral maps, manipulates the location of a windmill, deliberately mistranslates “devant” via linguistic sleight of hand, invents strawmen to argue against, lies about the archaeological situation and outright ignores primary sources when they contradict his version of events. The only way the site he and Kelly DeVries have claimed as the “true” location of the Battle of Crécy can possibly work is if you ignore a substantial amount of evidence against it and if you assume Philippe - otherwise brilliant in their account - was suddenly incredibly stupid in how he attacked the English.
If you’ve enjoyed this, then I’ll be posting another post with several appendices after these two posts have had their day in the sun, including a more full reconstruction of the battle (as I see it), a note on the paths through the Forest of Crécy (including evidence that they were adequate for an army in 1346) and various minor points I didn’t add either for lack of space or because I didn’t want to redo 40 endnotes.
2024.04.08 09:43 win88bz Win88
Win88 la mot nha cai truc tuyen hang dau noi tieng voi su da dang va chat luong dich vu ca cuoc va giai tri tren mang Voi giao dien nguoi dung than thien de su dung va dich vu khach hang 24 7 Win88 thu hut nguoi choi bang cach cung cap trai nghiem ca cuoc dang tin cay va thu vi Diem manh cua Win88 la viec lien tuc cap nhat cac tro choi moi kem theo cac chuong trinh khuyen mai va uu dai lon Voi cam ket ve an toan va cong bang Win88bz la lua chon hang dau cho nhung ai yeu thich ca cuoc truc tuyen Dia Chi 20 D Vinh Quynh Vinh Quynh Thanh Tri Ha Noi Viet Nam Trang web https://win88.bz/ Hotline 0961999777 Email Win88.bz@gmail.com Zipcode 12513 Tags win88 winbz nhacaiwin88
submitted by win88bz to u/win88bz [link] [comments]
2024.04.07 18:43 lingophilonaut Buying Vietnam Railways Ticket Online
 | I am planning a trip to Vietnam from Nepal. I would like to travel between cities (South to North) on train with my elderly parents for their convenience and so that they can enjoy beautiful views of the Vietnamese Landscape. I also read about Reunification Express that goes along the South-North railway line. However, whenever I try to book it on Tổng công ty đường sắt Việt Nam - Bán vé tàu trực tuyến (dsvn.vn) , the site shows that there are no connections found. submitted by lingophilonaut to VietNam [link] [comments] https://preview.redd.it/g93nf2x063tc1.png?width=1111&format=png&auto=webp&s=1aeef4a2d612f7f28ac23ec6a93f0bd43789ea39 Has the train been discontinued? Or are the trains already full? Would really appreciate if locals could advice :) Thank you in advance! |
2024.02.21 04:58 Dupidupidupidupidupi Qq gì z =]] Cảm thấy ghê tởm cái cách mà chúng nó truyền thông
Dm cho tao chửi nó trước, nó lên bài một cách khủng bố, với nội dung rẻ tiền mà nhìn thấy cái cách tụi nó pr bất thường cũng đủ biết là có bàn tay thúi của cha con tụi nó, tao ở miền nam và facebook bạn bè tao cũng có một vài đứa hưởng ứng rồi, chúng nó đi xem cái bọn cướp đất cướp nhà cửa tương lai của tụi nó rồi ngồi khóc, ghê tởm.Cái gì viết bài được là nó đưa lên bất chấp, cái văn giống như học sinh làm văn hồi còn đi học. Ở dưới thì là đám hồng ngưu chê phim Trấn Thành, thử hỏi còn cách nào không bưng bô để mà làm ăn ở VN không? hay là làm ăn được tí là chúng nó đưa tay thúi tới, từ bán hàng ở ngoài chợ , cho đến tiểu thương ăn nên làm ra là nó tới thu tiền. Hồi trước có coi cái clip cách trở nên nổi tiếng ở Việt Nam của kênh Bốc phốt tài chính thấy nói đúng quá, chỉ cần bạn là người nước ngoài, qua Việt Nam bập bẹ tôi yêu VN là hot ngay. Đhs qua VN học mấy môn này thì t cũng lạy, hay là bắt chước người bác nào đấy về nước giải phóng dân tộc? tụi nó còn dùng để truyền thông đc, tụi nó còn tâng bốc, xong thì mày ra chuồng gà ở.
https://preview.redd.it/6u2u1bk8uujc1.png?width=605&format=png&auto=webp&s=25b5f20cbf3fc38cbe1fe426856a2e231f5f674a
submitted by Dupidupidupidupidupi to TroChuyenLinhTinh [link] [comments]
https://preview.redd.it/6u2u1bk8uujc1.png?width=605&format=png&auto=webp&s=25b5f20cbf3fc38cbe1fe426856a2e231f5f674a
2024.02.16 09:33 Fender-Consider Đây là cách cộng sản trọng dụng nhân tài
Đó giờ nó vẫn là như vậy, nước nam ta mạt vận
submitted by Fender-Consider to TroChuyenLinhTinh [link] [comments]
2024.01.25 12:12 StunningOne8021 Công Đoàn CS liên kết với công ty tín dụng tặng quà kèm bẫy tín dụng công nhân
Tức là nó đéo tặng tiền mặt mà nó làm thẻ credit card hạn mức 5 triệu trong đó 300k mua shopee/tiki/lazada
Quá đốn mạt khi cấu kết với bọn tài chính chạy chỉ tiêu thẻ
https://tuoitre.vn/vi-sao-cong-nhan-tu-choi-nhan-qua-tet-2024012408232707.htm
submitted by StunningOne8021 to TroChuyenLinhTinh [link] [comments]
Quá đốn mạt khi cấu kết với bọn tài chính chạy chỉ tiêu thẻ
https://tuoitre.vn/vi-sao-cong-nhan-tu-choi-nhan-qua-tet-2024012408232707.htm
2024.01.15 12:13 Fit-Ordinary-4754 Vụ 2 nữ giảng viên thanh nhạc người Bắc gây lộn tại Nhạc viện Tp.HCM - Khi ý kiến MXH tác động
Khi sự vụ xảy ra, lập tức nhiều ý kiến vào hùa ăn theo em giảng viên đã đăng clip. Ngay cả 1 số "chính thống" của đảng đĩ cũng vậy, trong khi bọn được gọi là "phóng viên" chỉ cần gặp & phỏng vấn, ghi âm là sẽ rõ ngay (tất nhiên, cả 2 con giảng viên kia đều đéo cho phỏng vấn sau khi hạ hỏa ha ha ha ).
Nhưng chỉ khi ý kiến trung dung, khách quan của cư dân mạng đòi em nạn nhân đăng clip đối chứng thì bọn báo đảng đĩ mới "ghi nhận tình hình khách quan" trên báo chí đảng đĩ (hình minh họa)
Vậy mới nói, nếu không có ý kiến của đông đảo nhân dân tiến bộ, với tình trạng độc quyền truyền thông, độc quyền chạy "bình luận của bạn đọc", chế độ đảng đi CSVN muốn mưa có mưa, muốn nắng có nắng, dân chúng chỉ là những con cừu, bò, dê, ngựa, .... sống trong Trại Súc Vật mà thôi.
Sáng 12-1, nhạc sĩ Lưu Thiên Hương đăng tải bài viết đính kèm clip năm giây tố giảng viên V.T.M.H. đã có hành vi \"vu khống, thậm chí ném thẳng điện thoại vào mặt mình\" và gọi đây là sự việc \"vi phạm đạo đức trong giáo dục nghiêm trọng xảy ra tại Nhạc viện TP.HCM\" hiện nhận được sự chú ý của hơn 24.000 lượt theo dõi, gần 2.000 lượt bình luận và gần 800 lượt chia sẻ
Bài viết Khiển trách nghệ sĩ ưu tú ném điện thoại vào mặt nhạc sĩ Lưu Thiên Hương được đăng tải trên Tuổi Trẻ Online ngày 13-1 thu hút nhiều bình luận từ bạn đọc.
Bình luận dưới bài báo, bạn đọc tên Bảo viết: "Nghe chữ khiển trách cái muốn té ngửa".
Dưới bài báo Nhạc sĩ Lưu Thiên Hương tố bị nghệ sĩ ưu tú ném điện thoại vào mặt đăng trên Tuổi Trẻ Online ngày 12-1, bạn đọc Hoang Hung cho rằng "cần tước bỏ danh hiệu NSƯT" của cô V.T.M.H..
Tài khoản NgocTran thông cảm với nỗi bức xúc nhưng dẫu sao "hành động ném điện thoại cũng làm mất đi hình ảnh của một nhà giáo nhân dân".
Bên cạnh những ý kiến không đồng tình với hành vi của giảng viên V.T.M.H., cũng có nhiều ý kiến khác.
https://preview.redd.it/r1mm7obx6lcc1.png?width=617&format=png&auto=webp&s=8998027d3e40b91ce4d2e794749c1e4b9f0616c6
https://preview.redd.it/6vhhygzf7lcc1.png?width=941&format=png&auto=webp&s=e11fc46edde16f40acf774f883551027cb6329e8
(1) Vụ Võ Thị Minh Huyền 'phóng' điện thoại vào mặt Lưu Thiên Hương : Hai đầu dây cùng một mối : TroChuyenLinhTinh (reddit.com)
submitted by Fit-Ordinary-4754 to TroChuyenLinhTinh [link] [comments]
Nhưng chỉ khi ý kiến trung dung, khách quan của cư dân mạng đòi em nạn nhân đăng clip đối chứng thì bọn báo đảng đĩ mới "ghi nhận tình hình khách quan" trên báo chí đảng đĩ (hình minh họa)
Vậy mới nói, nếu không có ý kiến của đông đảo nhân dân tiến bộ, với tình trạng độc quyền truyền thông, độc quyền chạy "bình luận của bạn đọc", chế độ đảng đi CSVN muốn mưa có mưa, muốn nắng có nắng, dân chúng chỉ là những con cừu, bò, dê, ngựa, .... sống trong Trại Súc Vật mà thôi.
Sáng 12-1, nhạc sĩ Lưu Thiên Hương đăng tải bài viết đính kèm clip năm giây tố giảng viên V.T.M.H. đã có hành vi \"vu khống, thậm chí ném thẳng điện thoại vào mặt mình\" và gọi đây là sự việc \"vi phạm đạo đức trong giáo dục nghiêm trọng xảy ra tại Nhạc viện TP.HCM\" hiện nhận được sự chú ý của hơn 24.000 lượt theo dõi, gần 2.000 lượt bình luận và gần 800 lượt chia sẻ
Bài viết Khiển trách nghệ sĩ ưu tú ném điện thoại vào mặt nhạc sĩ Lưu Thiên Hương được đăng tải trên Tuổi Trẻ Online ngày 13-1 thu hút nhiều bình luận từ bạn đọc.
Bình luận dưới bài báo, bạn đọc tên Bảo viết: "Nghe chữ khiển trách cái muốn té ngửa".
Dưới bài báo Nhạc sĩ Lưu Thiên Hương tố bị nghệ sĩ ưu tú ném điện thoại vào mặt đăng trên Tuổi Trẻ Online ngày 12-1, bạn đọc Hoang Hung cho rằng "cần tước bỏ danh hiệu NSƯT" của cô V.T.M.H..
Tài khoản NgocTran thông cảm với nỗi bức xúc nhưng dẫu sao "hành động ném điện thoại cũng làm mất đi hình ảnh của một nhà giáo nhân dân".
Bên cạnh những ý kiến không đồng tình với hành vi của giảng viên V.T.M.H., cũng có nhiều ý kiến khác.
https://preview.redd.it/r1mm7obx6lcc1.png?width=617&format=png&auto=webp&s=8998027d3e40b91ce4d2e794749c1e4b9f0616c6
https://preview.redd.it/6vhhygzf7lcc1.png?width=941&format=png&auto=webp&s=e11fc46edde16f40acf774f883551027cb6329e8
(1) Vụ Võ Thị Minh Huyền 'phóng' điện thoại vào mặt Lưu Thiên Hương : Hai đầu dây cùng một mối : TroChuyenLinhTinh (reddit.com)
2024.01.10 17:27 zzFrostzz Điện thoại Samsung Galaxy A04 (3G+32G) SM-A045F Đồng
GIỚI THIỆU: ĐIỆN THOẠI SAMSUNG GALAXY A04 (3G+32G) SM-A045F ĐỒNG
Samsung Galaxy A04 một cái tên khá quen của dòng Galaxy A khi sở hữu cho mình một thiết kế đơn giản như rất tinh tế, camera cho những bức ảnh tốt và một viên pin lớn mang đến trải nghiệm lâu dài. - Điện thoại Samsung Galaxy A04 (3GB/32GB) sở hữu tấm nền IPS LCD, độ phân giải HD+ cùng kích thước 6.5 inch mang đến không gian giải trí thoải mái, phù hợp với các nhu cầu giải trí của đại đa số người dùng.
 - Hãng điện thoại Samsung đã trang bị trên máy con chip Mediatek Helio P35 với xung nhịp tối đa lên đến 2.3 GHz mang lại hiệu năng ổn định.
 - Điện thoại RAM 3 GB cùng ROM 32 GB mang đến khả năng đa nhiệm đủ dùng trên các ứng dụng cơ bản. Không gian lưu trữ tài liệu, video sẽ nhiều hơn nhờ khả năng mở rộng bộ nhớ trong lên đến 1 TB thông qua thẻ MicroSD.
 - Điện thoại Samsung Galaxy A trang bị camera sau với độ phân giải cảm biến chính đến 50 MP đi kèm là cảm biến phụ 2 MP, camera selfie 5 MP mang đến những tấm ảnh chất lượng, giúp bạn không bỏ lỡ bất kỳ khoảnh khắc nào.
 - Cung cấp năng lượng cho A04 là viên pin 5000 mAh, có thể đáp ứng một ngày với những tác vụ cơ bản và bạn không cần quá lo lắng về việc hết pin khi đang sử dụng.
Xem thêm
THÔNG SỐ KỸ THUẬT
| Thương hiệu | Samsung |
|---|---|
| Mã sản phẩm | A04 |
| Công nghệ màn hình |
- Chính 50 MP & Phụ 2 MP
- Làm đẹp
- Siêu cận (Macro)
- HDR
- Toàn cảnh (Panorama)
- Zoom kỹ thuật số
- 5 MP
- Hỗ trợ VideoCall thông qua ứng dụng OTT
- Chụp xóa phông
- Làm đẹp
- MediaTek Helio P35
- 8 nhân
- 64-bit
- IMG PowerVR GE8320
- 3 GB
- 32 GB
- Hỗ trợ tối đa 1TB
- 1 TB
- Có hỗ trợ 4G
- 2 Nano Sim
- Nano SIM
- Wifi 802.11 a/b/g/n/ac
- Wi-Fi Direct
- Dual-band (2.4 GHz/5 GHz)
- GALILEO
- GLONASS
- BEIDOU
- V5.0
- USB Type-C
- Jack 3.5 mm
- Nguyên khối
- Khung & Mặt lưng nhựa
- 5000 mAh
- Pin chuẩn Li-Po
- Mở khoá khuôn mặt
2024.01.10 15:33 zzFrostzz Điện thoại Samsung Galaxy A04 (3G+32G) SM-A045F Đồng
GIỚI THIỆU: ĐIỆN THOẠI SAMSUNG GALAXY A04 (3G+32G) SM-A045F ĐỒNG
Samsung Galaxy A04 một cái tên khá quen của dòng Galaxy A khi sở hữu cho mình một thiết kế đơn giản như rất tinh tế, camera cho những bức ảnh tốt và một viên pin lớn mang đến trải nghiệm lâu dài. • Điện thoại Samsung Galaxy A04 (3GB/32GB) sở hữu tấm nền IPS LCD, độ phân giải HD+ cùng kích thước 6.5 inch mang đến không gian giải trí thoải mái, phù hợp với các nhu cầu giải trí của đại đa số người dùng.
 • Hãng điện thoại Samsung đã trang bị trên máy con chip Mediatek Helio P35 với xung nhịp tối đa lên đến 2.3 GHz mang lại hiệu năng ổn định.
 • Điện thoại RAM 3 GB cùng ROM 32 GB mang đến khả năng đa nhiệm đủ dùng trên các ứng dụng cơ bản. Không gian lưu trữ tài liệu, video sẽ nhiều hơn nhờ khả năng mở rộng bộ nhớ trong lên đến 1 TB thông qua thẻ MicroSD.
 • Điện thoại Samsung Galaxy A trang bị camera sau với độ phân giải cảm biến chính đến 50 MP đi kèm là cảm biến phụ 2 MP, camera selfie 5 MP mang đến những tấm ảnh chất lượng, giúp bạn không bỏ lỡ bất kỳ khoảnh khắc nào.
 • Cung cấp năng lượng cho A04 là viên pin 5000 mAh, có thể đáp ứng một ngày với những tác vụ cơ bản và bạn không cần quá lo lắng về việc hết pin khi đang sử dụng.
[Xem thêm](javascript:void(0);)
THÔNG SỐ KỸ THUẬT
Thương hiệuSamsung
Mã sản phẩm
A04
Công nghệ màn hình
Độ phân giải
Màn hình
Mặt kính cảm ứng
Tần số quét
Camera sau
- Chính 50 MP & Phụ 2 MP
Đèn Flash
Chụp ảnh nâng cao
- Làm đẹp
- Siêu cận (Macro)
- HDR
- Toàn cảnh (Panorama)
- Zoom kỹ thuật số
- 5 MP
- Hỗ trợ VideoCall thông qua ứng dụng OTT
- Chụp xóa phông
- Làm đẹp
CPU
- MediaTek Helio P35
- 8 nhân
- 64-bit
- IMG PowerVR GE8320
- 3 GB
- 32 GB
- Hỗ trợ tối đa 1TB
- 1 TB
- Có hỗ trợ 4G
- 2 Nano Sim
- Nano SIM
- Wifi 802.11 a/b/g/n/ac
- Wi-Fi Direct
- Dual-band (2.4 GHz/5 GHz)
- GALILEO
- GLONASS
- BEIDOU
- V5.0
- USB Type-C
- Jack 3.5 mm
- Nguyên khối
- Khung & Mặt lưng nhựa
- 5000 mAh
- Pin chuẩn Li-Po
- Mở khoá khuôn mặt
12 tháng
Xuất xứ
Việt Nam
2024.01.10 15:24 zzFrostzz Điện thoại Samsung Galaxy A04 (3G+32G) SM-A045F Đồng
GIỚI THIỆU: ĐIỆN THOẠI SAMSUNG GALAXY A04 (3G+32G) SM-A045F ĐỒNG Samsung Galaxy A04 một cái tên khá quen của dòng Galaxy A khi sở hữu cho mình một thiết kế đơn giản như rất tinh tế, camera cho những bức ảnh tốt và một viên pin lớn mang đến trải nghiệm lâu dài.  • Điện thoại Samsung Galaxy A04 (3GB/32GB) sở hữu tấm nền IPS LCD, độ phân giải HD+ cùng kích thước 6.5 inch mang đến không gian giải trí thoải mái, phù hợp với các nhu cầu giải trí của đại đa số người dùng.  • Hãng điện thoại Samsung đã trang bị trên máy con chip Mediatek Helio P35 với xung nhịp tối đa lên đến 2.3 GHz mang lại hiệu năng ổn định.  • Điện thoại RAM 3 GB cùng ROM 32 GB mang đến khả năng đa nhiệm đủ dùng trên các ứng dụng cơ bản. Không gian lưu trữ tài liệu, video sẽ nhiều hơn nhờ khả năng mở rộng bộ nhớ trong lên đến 1 TB thông qua thẻ MicroSD.  • Điện thoại Samsung Galaxy A trang bị camera sau với độ phân giải cảm biến chính đến 50 MP đi kèm là cảm biến phụ 2 MP, camera selfie 5 MP mang đến những tấm ảnh chất lượng, giúp bạn không bỏ lỡ bất kỳ khoảnh khắc nào.  • Cung cấp năng lượng cho A04 là viên pin 5000 mAh, có thể đáp ứng một ngày với những tác vụ cơ bản và bạn không cần quá lo lắng về việc hết pin khi đang sử dụng.  [Xem thêm](javascript:void(0);) ### THÔNG SỐ KỸ THUẬT
| Thương hiệu | Samsung |
|---|---|
| Mã sản phẩm | A04 |
| Công nghệ màn hình | * IPS LCD |
| Độ phân giải | * 720 x 1600 Pixel |
| Màn hình | * 6.5 inch |
| Mặt kính cảm ứng | * Kính cường lực Corning Gorilla Glass 3 |
| Tần số quét | * 60Hz |
| Camera sau | * Chính 50 MP & Phụ 2 MP |
| Quay phim | * Quay phim FullHD 1080p@30fps |
| Đèn Flash | * Có |
| Chụp ảnh nâng cao | * Làm đẹp * Siêu cận (Macro) * HDR * Toàn cảnh (Panorama) * Zoom kỹ thuật số |
| Camera trước | * 5 MP |
| Videocall | * Hỗ trợ VideoCall thông qua ứng dụng OTT |
| Thông tin khác | * Chụp xóa phông * Làm đẹp |
| Hệ điều hành | * Android 12 |
| CPU | * MediaTek Helio P35 |
| Số nhân | * 8 nhân |
| Nền tảng | * 64-bit |
| Chip đồ họa (GPU) | * IMG PowerVR GE8320 |
| RAM | * 3 GB |
| Bộ nhớ | * 32 GB |
| Thẻ nhớ ngoài | * Hỗ trợ tối đa 1TB |
| Hỗ trợ thẻ tối đa | * 1 TB |
| Hỗ trợ 4G | * Có hỗ trợ 4G |
| Số khe sim | * 2 Nano Sim |
| Loại Sim | * Nano SIM |
| Wifi | * Wifi 802.11 a/b/g/n/ac * Wi-Fi Direct * Dual-band (2.4 GHz/5 GHz) |
| GPS | * GALILEO * GLONASS * BEIDOU |
| Bluetooth | * V5.0 |
| Cổng kết nối/sạc | * USB Type-C |
| Jack tai nghe | * Jack 3.5 mm |
| Thiết kế | * Nguyên khối |
| Chất liệu | * Khung & Mặt lưng nhựa |
| Dung lượng pin | * 5000 mAh |
| Loại pin | * Pin chuẩn Li-Po |
| Chức năng khác | * Mở khoá khuôn mặt |
| Bảo hành | 12 tháng |
| Xuất xứ | Việt Nam |
2024.01.10 15:20 zzFrostzz Điện thoại Samsung Galaxy A04 (3G+32G) SM-A045F Đồng
GIỚI THIỆU: ĐIỆN THOẠI SAMSUNG GALAXY A04 (3G+32G) SM-A045F ĐỒNG
Samsung Galaxy A04 một cái tên khá quen của dòng Galaxy A khi sở hữu cho mình một thiết kế đơn giản như rất tinh tế, camera cho những bức ảnh tốt và một viên pin lớn mang đến trải nghiệm lâu dài.
• Điện thoại Samsung Galaxy A04 (3GB/32GB) sở hữu tấm nền IPS LCD, độ phân giải HD+ cùng kích thước 6.5 inch mang đến không gian giải trí thoải mái, phù hợp với các nhu cầu giải trí của đại đa số người dùng.
• Hãng điện thoại Samsung đã trang bị trên máy con chip Mediatek Helio P35 với xung nhịp tối đa lên đến 2.3 GHz mang lại hiệu năng ổn định.
• Điện thoại RAM 3 GB cùng ROM 32 GB mang đến khả năng đa nhiệm đủ dùng trên các ứng dụng cơ bản. Không gian lưu trữ tài liệu, video sẽ nhiều hơn nhờ khả năng mở rộng bộ nhớ trong lên đến 1 TB thông qua thẻ MicroSD.
• Điện thoại Samsung Galaxy A trang bị camera sau với độ phân giải cảm biến chính đến 50 MP đi kèm là cảm biến phụ 2 MP, camera selfie 5 MP mang đến những tấm ảnh chất lượng, giúp bạn không bỏ lỡ bất kỳ khoảnh khắc nào.
• Cung cấp năng lượng cho A04 là viên pin 5000 mAh, có thể đáp ứng một ngày với những tác vụ cơ bản và bạn không cần quá lo lắng về việc hết pin khi đang sử dụng.
THÔNG SỐ KỸ THUẬT
| Thương hiệu | Samsung |
| Mã sản phẩm | A04 |
| Công nghệ màn hình | |
| Độ phân giải | |
| Màn hình | |
| Mặt kính cảm ứng | |
| Tần số quét | |
| Camera sau |
|
| Quay phim | |
| Đèn Flash | |
| Chụp ảnh nâng cao |
|
| Camera trước |
|
| Videocall |
|
| Thông tin khác |
|
| Hệ điều hành | |
| CPU |
|
| Số nhân |
|
| Nền tảng |
|
| Chip đồ họa (GPU) |
|
| RAM |
|
| Bộ nhớ |
|
| Thẻ nhớ ngoài |
|
| Hỗ trợ thẻ tối đa |
|
| Hỗ trợ 4G |
|
| Số khe sim |
|
| Loại Sim |
|
| Wifi |
|
| GPS |
|
| Bluetooth |
|
| Cổng kết nối/sạc |
|
| Jack tai nghe |
|
| Thiết kế |
|
| Chất liệu |
|
| Dung lượng pin |
|
| Loại pin |
|
| Chức năng khác |
|
| Bảo hành | 12 tháng |
| Xuất xứ | Việt Nam |
2023.12.12 06:45 hezema23 Danh gia ve tinh nang "Always On Display" va "Ambient Display" tren dien thoai
 | Đánh giá về tính năng "Always On Display" và "Ambient Display" trên điện thoạiTrong những ngày hiện đại, khi công nghệ liên tục đổi mới, tính năng "Always On Display" (AOD) và "Ambient Display" (AD) trên điện thoại di động ngày càng thu hút sự quan tâm của người dùng với khả năng hiển thị thông tin mà không cần bật màn hình chính. Điều này mở ra một thế giới mới về trải nghiệm người dùng, đặt ra nhiều cơ hội và thách thức cho những cửa hàng điện thoại muốn giới thiệu những sản phẩm tiên tiến nhất với tính năng này. Trong bài viết này, chúng ta sẽ cùng nhau khám phá sâu hơn về những ưu điểm và nhược điểm kỹ thuật của AOD và AD, đồng thời tìm hiểu xem liệu những tính năng này có đánh bại trái tim của người dùng hay không."Always On Display" (AOD): Lợi Ích và Ưu Điểm1. Tiết Kiệm Thời Gian và Tiện Ích HơnMột trong những lợi ích nổi bật nhất của tính năng AOD là khả năng hiển thị thông tin cơ bản mà không cần mở khóa màn hình. Thông tin về thời gian, thông báo, và ngày có thể hiển thị ngay trên màn hình chính, giúp người dùng tiết kiệm thời gian và công sức. https://preview.redd.it/t0t7liplus5c1.png?width=780&format=png&auto=webp&s=ad4271ffd13a17d9258f766207ab0b3d36db2779 2. Hiển Thị Thông Báo Nhanh ChóngAOD cũng mang lại trải nghiệm hiển thị thông báo nhanh chóng mà không làm gián đoạn công việc của người dùng. Các thông báo như cuộc gọi nhỡ, tin nhắn, và ứng dụng quan trọng có thể hiển thị trực tiếp trên màn hình khóa, giúp người dùng nhanh chóng nhận biết và phản hồi. https://preview.redd.it/3em7hnlpus5c1.png?width=800&format=png&auto=webp&s=0324c1257c518eef6c8f84c1e2340b50409af34c 3. Tính Tiện Lợi và Hiện ĐạiAOD mang lại cảm giác hiện đại và tiện lợi khi người dùng có thể xem thông tin mà không cần bật hoàn toàn màn hình. Điều này không chỉ làm tăng tính thẩm mỹ của điện thoại mà còn giúp người dùng duy trì liên lạc mà không làm gián đoạn hoạt động khác. Để trải nghiệm tốt nhất với AOD, hãy tìm đến các cửa hàng điện thoại Chính hãng , nơi bạn có thể tận hưởng tính năng này trên những sản phẩm chất lượng và đảm bảo."Ambient Display" (AD): Ưu Điểm và Nhược Điểm Kỹ Thuật1. Hiệu Suất Pin Tốt HơnAmbient Display được thiết kế để tiết kiệm năng lượng bằng cách hiển thị thông tin chỉ khi cần thiết. Khi cảm biến phát hiện sự chuyển động hoặc có thông báo, màn hình sẽ kích hoạt ngắn gọn để hiển thị thông tin. Điều này giúp kéo dài thời lượng pin và giảm áp lực đặt ra cho người dùng. https://preview.redd.it/eh39o77tus5c1.png?width=780&format=png&auto=webp&s=24a7113ee2a9e6312eb3d68ca5b43ee8d94465d9 2. Trải Nghiệm Tích Hợp Với Môi TrườngAD thường đi kèm với khả năng tự điều chỉnh độ sáng của màn hình dựa trên mức ánh sáng xung quanh. Điều này không chỉ tạo ra một trải nghiệm thân thiện với mắt mà còn giúp người dùng dễ dàng đọc thông tin ngay cả trong điều kiện ánh sáng yếu.3. Hạn Chế Cho Những Môi Trường Đặc BiệtTuy nhiên, có những trường hợp nơi AD có thể gặp khó khăn, như trong môi trường quá sáng hoặc quá tối. Trong những tình huống này, tính năng này có thể không hoạt động hiệu quả, ảnh hưởng đến trải nghiệm sử dụng của người dùng. https://preview.redd.it/xd0cm2grus5c1.png?width=800&format=png&auto=webp&s=679bf70881a84cb5579dfbf86999f6a219a1ceea Kết LuậnNhìn chung, "Always On Display" và "Ambient Display" không chỉ là những tính năng thú vị mà còn mang lại nhiều lợi ích cho người dùng điện thoại di động. Tuy nhiên, quyết định sử dụng hay không sử dụng phụ thuộc vào sở thích cá nhân và nhu cầu sử dụng của từng người. Với khả năng tiết kiệm thời gian, pin, và mang lại trải nghiệm hiện đại, AOD và AD là những tính năng đáng chú ý trên thị trường điện thoại hiện nay.Nếu bạn đang tìm kiếm điện thoại mới để trải nghiệm những tính năng này, có nhiều cửa hàng trực tuyến đáng tin cậy mà bạn có thể tham khảo. Những cửa hàng như Di Động Việt, CellphoneS, Hùng Mobile, MobileCity, Galaxy Di Động, Hoàng Hà Mobile, và nhiều lựa chọn khác có sẵn để đáp ứng nhu cầu của bạn. Bạn có thể khám phá và so sánh các sản phẩm, giá cả, cũng như đánh giá từ người dùng trước đó để đảm bảo rằng bạn sẽ có quyết định đúng đắn và hài lòng khi mua sắm trực tuyến. |
2023.12.06 13:17 lanhuevietnam Hue International Music Week (Dec 8-12, 2023)
 | submitted by lanhuevietnam to u/lanhuevietnam [link] [comments] |
2023.12.03 02:06 Medical-Project-2734 My account got locked for no reason at all?? What the hell is wrong w Facebook?
 | It all happened on the night of 1st December. I wasn't hacked or anything, literally was just scrolling around Facebook until my account suddenly got locked and stuff (image provided). There's absolutely no "get started" button or anything to unlock my account... My 10 year-old account, gone, as easy as that. submitted by Medical-Project-2734 to facebook [link] [comments] I've been spending these 2 days trying to figure out some ways to recover my account including changing passwords (I've changed it like, 3 times I think?), submitting my ID, etc. This is straight up just outrageous. Does anybody have a way around this? I'd love some advice on this, tysm. And yes, I can always create a new account, but this account holds a lot of my precious memories with my close friends so I really want to have it back. https://preview.redd.it/6um84mk7cz3c1.png?width=1687&format=png&auto=webp&s=69365c3c3d58762ca5bbe3679c28241bb6675422 |
2023.11.10 03:08 realmanhhung Mối quan hệ xuất nhập khẩu hàng hoá giữa Việt Nam và Trung Quốc
Việt Nam và Trung Quốc là hai đối tác thương mại quan trọng nhất của nhau trong khu vực Đông Á. Các hoạt động xuất nhập khẩu hàng hoá giữa hai nước này đóng vai trò quan trọng trong việc thúc đẩy phát triển kinh tế và tăng cường hợp tác hai bên.
Việt Nam là một trong những nước có nền kinh tế đang phát triển nhanh nhất trong khu vực. Với những lợi thế về nguồn lao động giá rẻ và năng lực sản xuất, Việt Nam đã trở thành một đối tác xuất khẩu hàng hoá quan trọng đối với Trung Quốc. Các sản phẩm chủ lực xuất khẩu của Việt Nam sang Trung Quốc bao gồm: điện tử, may mặc, giày dép, sản phẩm nông nghiệp và các sản phẩm gia dụng.
Trung Quốc, với quy mô kinh tế lớn và nền công nghiệp phát triển, là một thị trường tiêu thụ hứa hẹn đối với hàng hoá và dịch vụ của Việt Nam. Việt Nam xuất khẩu sang Trung Quốc các mặt hàng như: dầu thực vật, hạt điều, gỗ và các sản phẩm gỗ, điện thoại di động, đồ gốm sứ và nhiều mặt hàng khác. Đặc biệt, xuất khẩu nông sản và thực phẩm từ Việt Nam sang Trung Quốc đã tăng trưởng đáng kể trong những năm gần đây.
Để tăng cường hoạt động xuất nhập khẩu hàng hoá giữa hai nước, cả Việt Nam và Trung Quốc đã thực hiện nhiều biện pháp nhằm thuận lợi cho các doanh nghiệp hai bên. Hai nước đã thiết lập các khu kinh tế đặc biệt và khu công nghiệp chung nhằm tạo điều kiện thuận lợi cho các doanh nghiệp sản xuất và xuất khẩu hàng hoá.
Ngoài ra, Việt Nam và Trung Quốc cũng đã ký kết nhiều hiệp định thương mại nhằm tạo cơ sở pháp lý cho hoạt động xuất nhập khẩu hàng hoá. Các hiệp định như Hiệp định Thương mại tự do ASEAN - Trung Quốc (ACFTA) và Hiệp định Đối tác Kinh tế Toàn diện Xuyên Thái Bình Dương (RCEP) đã giúp tăng cường quyền và lợi ích của các doanh nghiệp hai bên.
Tuy nhiên, cũng cần lưu ý rằng việc xuất khẩu hàng hoá giữa hai nước không chỉ đem lại lợi ích mà còn đặt ra những thách thức. Các vấn đề như khung pháp lý, quy định về chất lượng, vận chuyển và thủ tục hải quan cần được cải thiện để tăng cường hiệu quả hoạt động thương mại hai bên.
Tóm lại, các hoạt động xuất nhập khẩu hàng hoá giữa Việt Nam và Trung Quốc đóng vai trò quan trọng trong việc mở rộng hợp tác kinh tế và thúc đẩy phát triển. Sự tăng cường hợp tác và điều chỉnh các chính sách thương mại có thể tạo ra cơ hội mới và đồng thời giải quyết những thách thức đang tồn tại, từ đó đảm bảo mối quan hệ kinh tế giữa hai nước ngày càng bền vững và có lợi cho cả hai bên.
https://tinphonglogistics.com/kinh-nghiem/cach-chuyen-taobao-sang-tieng-viet-3731.html
https://tinphonglogistics.com/kinh-nghiem/cach-doi-tien-trung-sang-tien-viet-tren-taobao-3733.html
https://tinphonglogistics.com/kinh-nghiem/cach-lay-video-tren-facebook-ve-dien-thoai-3738.html
https://tinphonglogistics.com/kinh-nghiem/dusto-tmall-3759.html
https://tinphonglogistics.com/kinh-nghiem/cach-tim-nguon-hang-si-tren-taobao-3762.html
https://tinphonglogistics.com/kinh-nghiem/zara-china-3763.html
https://tinphonglogistics.com/kinh-nghiem/1-van-dai-te-bang-bao-nhieu-tien-viet-3767.html
https://tinphonglogistics.com/kinh-nghiem/do-noi-dia-trung-quoc-3768.html
https://tinphonglogistics.com/kinh-nghiem/taobao-1688-tmall-jd-3776.html
https://tinphonglogistics.com/kinh-nghiem/app-mua-hang-trung-quoc-3777.html
https://tinphonglogistics.com/kinh-nghiem/1-te-trung-quoc-bang-bao-nhieu-tien-viet-nam-3785.html
https://tinphonglogistics.com/kinh-nghiem/chuyen-phat-nhanh-buu-dien-mat-bao-lau-3788.html
https://tinphonglogistics.com/kinh-nghiem/hang-quang-chau-la-hang-gi-3789.html
https://tinphonglogistics.com/kinh-nghiem/nguon-nhap-hang-quan-ao-quang-chau-ha-noi-3942.html
https://tinphonglogistics.com/kinh-nghiem/black-friday-la-ngay-gi-3889.html
https://tinphonglogistics.com/kinh-nghiem/freesize-la-gi-3800.html
https://tinphonglogistics.com/kinh-nghiem/cach-xem-danh-gia-tren-taobao-3807.html
https://tinphonglogistics.com/kinh-nghiem/size-xs-la-bao-nhieu-kg-3808.html
https://tinphonglogistics.com/kinh-nghiem/tieu-hong-thu-xiaohongshu-la-gi-3811.html
https://tinphonglogistics.com/kinh-nghiem/cach-kiem-tra-don-hang-bang-so-dien-thoai-3816.html
https://tinphonglogistics.com/kinh-nghiem/zip-code-trung-quoc-3819.html
https://tinphonglogistics.com/kinh-nghiem/bang-size-giay-han-quoc-voi-viet-nam-3822.html
https://tinphonglogistics.com/kinh-nghiem/giay-jordan-chinh-hang-gia-bao-nhieu-3827.html
https://tinphonglogistics.com/kinh-nghiem/160-do-bang-bao-nhieu-tien-viet-3830.html
https://tinphonglogistics.com/kinh-nghiem/hang-outlet-la-gi-3835.html
https://tinphonglogistics.com/kinh-nghiem/ma-vach-trung-quoc-la-bao-nhieu-3837.html
https://tinphonglogistics.com/kinh-nghiem/size-m-la-gi-3838.html
https://tinphonglogistics.com/kinh-nghiem/douyin-la-gi-3842.html
https://tinphonglogistics.com/kinh-nghiem/mang-xa-hoi-trung-quoc-3853.html
https://tinphonglogistics.com/kinh-nghiem/app-livestream-trung-quoc-3857.html
https://tinphonglogistics.com/kinh-nghiem/size-xl-la-gi-3859.html
https://tinphonglogistics.com/kinh-nghiem/gia-si-la-gi-3860.html
https://tinphonglogistics.com/kinh-nghiem/mat-na-noi-dia-trung-3868.html
https://tinphonglogistics.com/kinh-nghiem/black-friday-la-ngay-gi-3889.html
https://tinphonglogistics.com/kinh-nghiem/size-l-bao-nhieu-kg-3897.html
https://tinphonglogistics.com/kinh-nghiem/dropshipping-la-gi-3902.html
https://tinphonglogistics.com/kinh-nghiem/xianyu-la-gi-3904.html
https://tinphonglogistics.com/kinh-nghiem/nhung-mau-ao-khoac-nu-hot-nhat-hien-nay-3908.html
https://tinphonglogistics.com/kinh-nghiem/lego-trung-quoc-3914.html
https://tinphonglogistics.com/kinh-nghiem/suon-xam-trung-quoc-3917.html
https://tinphonglogistics.com/kinh-nghiem/do-co-trang-trung-quoc-3918.html
https://tinphonglogistics.com/kinh-nghiem/tui-miocra-koly-la-gi-3926.html
https://tinphonglogistics.com/kinh-nghiem/tram-cai-toc-trung-quoc-3919.html
https://tinphonglogistics.com/kinh-nghiem/giay-nu-cao-cap-hang-hieu-3924.html
https://tinphonglogistics.com/kinh-nghiem/ma-buu-chinh-la-gi-3928.html
https://tinphonglogistics.com/kinh-nghiem/phan-mem-lam-net-anh-online-3929.html
https://tinphonglogistics.com/kinh-nghiem/tiktok-shop-la-gi-3935.html
https://tinphonglogistics.com/kinh-nghiem/dich-tieng-anh-sang-tieng-viet-3934.html
https://tinphonglogistics.com/kinh-nghiem/wholesale-la-gi-3936.html
https://tinphonglogistics.com/kinh-nghiem/mua-hang-quang-chau-3941.html
https://tinphonglogistics.com/kinh-nghiem/nguon-nhap-hang-quan-ao-quang-chau-ha-noi-3942.html
https://tinphonglogistics.com/kinh-nghiem/adlv-la-gi-3943.html
https://tinphonglogistics.com/kinh-nghiem/shop-uy-tin-tren-1688-3948.html
https://tinphonglogistics.com/kinh-nghiem/cho-quang-chau-3950.html
https://tinphonglogistics.com/kinh-nghiem/chiet-khau-taobao-1688-3741.html
https://tinphonglogistics.com/kinh-nghiem/cach-nhap-hang-quang-chau-3756.html
submitted by realmanhhung to tinphonglogistics [link] [comments]
Việt Nam là một trong những nước có nền kinh tế đang phát triển nhanh nhất trong khu vực. Với những lợi thế về nguồn lao động giá rẻ và năng lực sản xuất, Việt Nam đã trở thành một đối tác xuất khẩu hàng hoá quan trọng đối với Trung Quốc. Các sản phẩm chủ lực xuất khẩu của Việt Nam sang Trung Quốc bao gồm: điện tử, may mặc, giày dép, sản phẩm nông nghiệp và các sản phẩm gia dụng.
Trung Quốc, với quy mô kinh tế lớn và nền công nghiệp phát triển, là một thị trường tiêu thụ hứa hẹn đối với hàng hoá và dịch vụ của Việt Nam. Việt Nam xuất khẩu sang Trung Quốc các mặt hàng như: dầu thực vật, hạt điều, gỗ và các sản phẩm gỗ, điện thoại di động, đồ gốm sứ và nhiều mặt hàng khác. Đặc biệt, xuất khẩu nông sản và thực phẩm từ Việt Nam sang Trung Quốc đã tăng trưởng đáng kể trong những năm gần đây.
Để tăng cường hoạt động xuất nhập khẩu hàng hoá giữa hai nước, cả Việt Nam và Trung Quốc đã thực hiện nhiều biện pháp nhằm thuận lợi cho các doanh nghiệp hai bên. Hai nước đã thiết lập các khu kinh tế đặc biệt và khu công nghiệp chung nhằm tạo điều kiện thuận lợi cho các doanh nghiệp sản xuất và xuất khẩu hàng hoá.
Ngoài ra, Việt Nam và Trung Quốc cũng đã ký kết nhiều hiệp định thương mại nhằm tạo cơ sở pháp lý cho hoạt động xuất nhập khẩu hàng hoá. Các hiệp định như Hiệp định Thương mại tự do ASEAN - Trung Quốc (ACFTA) và Hiệp định Đối tác Kinh tế Toàn diện Xuyên Thái Bình Dương (RCEP) đã giúp tăng cường quyền và lợi ích của các doanh nghiệp hai bên.
Tuy nhiên, cũng cần lưu ý rằng việc xuất khẩu hàng hoá giữa hai nước không chỉ đem lại lợi ích mà còn đặt ra những thách thức. Các vấn đề như khung pháp lý, quy định về chất lượng, vận chuyển và thủ tục hải quan cần được cải thiện để tăng cường hiệu quả hoạt động thương mại hai bên.
Tóm lại, các hoạt động xuất nhập khẩu hàng hoá giữa Việt Nam và Trung Quốc đóng vai trò quan trọng trong việc mở rộng hợp tác kinh tế và thúc đẩy phát triển. Sự tăng cường hợp tác và điều chỉnh các chính sách thương mại có thể tạo ra cơ hội mới và đồng thời giải quyết những thách thức đang tồn tại, từ đó đảm bảo mối quan hệ kinh tế giữa hai nước ngày càng bền vững và có lợi cho cả hai bên.
https://tinphonglogistics.com/kinh-nghiem/cach-chuyen-taobao-sang-tieng-viet-3731.html
https://tinphonglogistics.com/kinh-nghiem/cach-doi-tien-trung-sang-tien-viet-tren-taobao-3733.html
https://tinphonglogistics.com/kinh-nghiem/cach-lay-video-tren-facebook-ve-dien-thoai-3738.html
https://tinphonglogistics.com/kinh-nghiem/dusto-tmall-3759.html
https://tinphonglogistics.com/kinh-nghiem/cach-tim-nguon-hang-si-tren-taobao-3762.html
https://tinphonglogistics.com/kinh-nghiem/zara-china-3763.html
https://tinphonglogistics.com/kinh-nghiem/1-van-dai-te-bang-bao-nhieu-tien-viet-3767.html
https://tinphonglogistics.com/kinh-nghiem/do-noi-dia-trung-quoc-3768.html
https://tinphonglogistics.com/kinh-nghiem/taobao-1688-tmall-jd-3776.html
https://tinphonglogistics.com/kinh-nghiem/app-mua-hang-trung-quoc-3777.html
https://tinphonglogistics.com/kinh-nghiem/1-te-trung-quoc-bang-bao-nhieu-tien-viet-nam-3785.html
https://tinphonglogistics.com/kinh-nghiem/chuyen-phat-nhanh-buu-dien-mat-bao-lau-3788.html
https://tinphonglogistics.com/kinh-nghiem/hang-quang-chau-la-hang-gi-3789.html
https://tinphonglogistics.com/kinh-nghiem/nguon-nhap-hang-quan-ao-quang-chau-ha-noi-3942.html
https://tinphonglogistics.com/kinh-nghiem/black-friday-la-ngay-gi-3889.html
https://tinphonglogistics.com/kinh-nghiem/freesize-la-gi-3800.html
https://tinphonglogistics.com/kinh-nghiem/cach-xem-danh-gia-tren-taobao-3807.html
https://tinphonglogistics.com/kinh-nghiem/size-xs-la-bao-nhieu-kg-3808.html
https://tinphonglogistics.com/kinh-nghiem/tieu-hong-thu-xiaohongshu-la-gi-3811.html
https://tinphonglogistics.com/kinh-nghiem/cach-kiem-tra-don-hang-bang-so-dien-thoai-3816.html
https://tinphonglogistics.com/kinh-nghiem/zip-code-trung-quoc-3819.html
https://tinphonglogistics.com/kinh-nghiem/bang-size-giay-han-quoc-voi-viet-nam-3822.html
https://tinphonglogistics.com/kinh-nghiem/giay-jordan-chinh-hang-gia-bao-nhieu-3827.html
https://tinphonglogistics.com/kinh-nghiem/160-do-bang-bao-nhieu-tien-viet-3830.html
https://tinphonglogistics.com/kinh-nghiem/hang-outlet-la-gi-3835.html
https://tinphonglogistics.com/kinh-nghiem/ma-vach-trung-quoc-la-bao-nhieu-3837.html
https://tinphonglogistics.com/kinh-nghiem/size-m-la-gi-3838.html
https://tinphonglogistics.com/kinh-nghiem/douyin-la-gi-3842.html
https://tinphonglogistics.com/kinh-nghiem/mang-xa-hoi-trung-quoc-3853.html
https://tinphonglogistics.com/kinh-nghiem/app-livestream-trung-quoc-3857.html
https://tinphonglogistics.com/kinh-nghiem/size-xl-la-gi-3859.html
https://tinphonglogistics.com/kinh-nghiem/gia-si-la-gi-3860.html
https://tinphonglogistics.com/kinh-nghiem/mat-na-noi-dia-trung-3868.html
https://tinphonglogistics.com/kinh-nghiem/black-friday-la-ngay-gi-3889.html
https://tinphonglogistics.com/kinh-nghiem/size-l-bao-nhieu-kg-3897.html
https://tinphonglogistics.com/kinh-nghiem/dropshipping-la-gi-3902.html
https://tinphonglogistics.com/kinh-nghiem/xianyu-la-gi-3904.html
https://tinphonglogistics.com/kinh-nghiem/nhung-mau-ao-khoac-nu-hot-nhat-hien-nay-3908.html
https://tinphonglogistics.com/kinh-nghiem/lego-trung-quoc-3914.html
https://tinphonglogistics.com/kinh-nghiem/suon-xam-trung-quoc-3917.html
https://tinphonglogistics.com/kinh-nghiem/do-co-trang-trung-quoc-3918.html
https://tinphonglogistics.com/kinh-nghiem/tui-miocra-koly-la-gi-3926.html
https://tinphonglogistics.com/kinh-nghiem/tram-cai-toc-trung-quoc-3919.html
https://tinphonglogistics.com/kinh-nghiem/giay-nu-cao-cap-hang-hieu-3924.html
https://tinphonglogistics.com/kinh-nghiem/ma-buu-chinh-la-gi-3928.html
https://tinphonglogistics.com/kinh-nghiem/phan-mem-lam-net-anh-online-3929.html
https://tinphonglogistics.com/kinh-nghiem/tiktok-shop-la-gi-3935.html
https://tinphonglogistics.com/kinh-nghiem/dich-tieng-anh-sang-tieng-viet-3934.html
https://tinphonglogistics.com/kinh-nghiem/wholesale-la-gi-3936.html
https://tinphonglogistics.com/kinh-nghiem/mua-hang-quang-chau-3941.html
https://tinphonglogistics.com/kinh-nghiem/nguon-nhap-hang-quan-ao-quang-chau-ha-noi-3942.html
https://tinphonglogistics.com/kinh-nghiem/adlv-la-gi-3943.html
https://tinphonglogistics.com/kinh-nghiem/shop-uy-tin-tren-1688-3948.html
https://tinphonglogistics.com/kinh-nghiem/cho-quang-chau-3950.html
https://tinphonglogistics.com/kinh-nghiem/chiet-khau-taobao-1688-3741.html
https://tinphonglogistics.com/kinh-nghiem/cach-nhap-hang-quang-chau-3756.html
2023.11.09 22:10 Naudilent When Views and Reviews Lurks -- My Recent Watches
After 32 movies, 2 series, and 1 documentary for October, it's back to normal...with another seven movies. My Year of Lots of Horror continues~
The TL;DR The Blob: The rare remake that reaches the level of the original. The Pact: A perfectly fine ghost story with some added twists. Malignant: Brad Dourif plays Brad Dourif as Jigsaw, but with less fun and games. The Hallow: Alien + The Thing + Irish folklore + Cronenberg. Excellent movie. Host: Brilliantly done, it’s the ideal indie horror Covid lockdown film. Deadstream: Proving a horror-comedy can perfectly combine both elements. When Evil Lurks: The uncompromising new horror buffet you’ve heard about. Damn.
The Blob (1988): “But don’t worry, there’s no sex or anything bad.” The Blob stars a jock, a cheerleader, and a bad boy loner as the “about to be breakfast” club fighting it out against an ambitious jello. It only takes 15 minutes to get to the blobbening, which is quickly followed by something far more horrific: filling out hospital paperwork. The blob embiggens, but a weakness is found — Kevin Dillon’s hair extensions — setting up the epic finale, but what really sells The Blob is the humor, absent in the Steve McQueen led original. Just a fun popcorn flick.
Gore: Moderate. Nudity: None, despite having two Playboy Playmates in the cast. Trivia: James Wan was a fan of lead actor Shawnee Smith, which landed her a role in the Saw franchise. Rented from Amazon.
The Pact (2012): “She’s taking all the light.” Looking at the title has you wondering, “What was the pact?” Something involving Annie’s (Caity Lotz) deceased mother, something to come, or both? Disappearances, violent hauntings, and unfolding discoveries take up the first half of the film. Casper Van Dien plays a cop with a lot of free time on his hands to help our protagonist. Talk about a guy who likes to keep busy; his IMDB is insane, with everything from Starship Troopers to Sharktopus vs Whalewolf on his CV. It’s a less complicated tale than other “what was my family member up to before they died” entries like Hereditary and The Night House, but the story is its own, and it works pretty well.
Gore: Low. Nudity: Just a little jiggle. Easter Egg: The first two names on Annie’s laptop contact list are “Sheridan” and “Le_Fanu.” Tubi
Malignant (2013): “I’m gonna fix you.” Not to be confused with James Wan’s 2021 production. After losing his wife to cancer some months previously, Allex has chosen the most optimal medical treatment for his serious depression: serious drinking. A mysterous altruist with shaky conceptions of consent offers help via a multi-step program that includes stalking, implants, butterflies, mind control, murder, therapeutic extortion, and a cure. Maybe. The legendary Brad Dourif co-stars as driver of Allex’s “therapy,” but he can’t raise Malignant much above average. It operates on the level of a mild thriller, with few scares surrounding its themes of alcoholism going terribly wrong.
Gore: Moderately bloody. Nudity: None. Tubi
The Hallow (2015): “A book of fucking fairy tales.” Adam and Clare move to a rural Irish town where he’s to survey the local forest, which the locals believe to be populated by the wee folk. They soon learn that “wee” does not apply to the creature’s claws nor to how pissed off they are for Adam to be roaming their woods. With a movie like this, you immediately wonder how production will handle the “fairies.” In the similarly styled Unwelcome (2023), they go all in on puppetry to good effect, playing it seriously until the very end, when it goes full camp. The Hallow isn’t playing around though; the tone is as dark as most of the scenes, and Galadriel would shit herself if she saw the things of the forest. It’s thick with tension, psychological and body horror elements, and sticks the landing with only a little padding. If I have a complaint, it’s that the baby screams so damn much you’d think he’s auditioning for Babadook 2. Otherwise, a great story.
Gore: Some. Nudity: None. Amazon
Host (2020): “I’m gonna be smashed if we carry this on.” A movie about what happens when you’re not into tabletop rpg’s, which sustained my friends and I through lockdown very well. No, instead these folks decide to hold a séance, and even if you haven’t seen Host, you know how it goes. Filmed during the lockdown using iPhones attached to laptops, it’s a brisk, tension-packed flick that spends about 15 minutes getting going before the spooks fly. At just over an hour (the length of a free Zoom call back then), it wastes no time and delivers on the horror. Great little film.
Gore: Low but present. Nudity: None. Shudder
Deadstream (2022): “Alright, let’s hurry before I think it through.” Beleaguered internet stunt puller Shawn Ruddy pulls an all-nighter at a haunted house — and gets haunted. Joseph Winter channels a lot of Shaggy and David Rose (Schitt’s Creek) in his portrayal of brave-until-he-isn’t Shawn. It’s very funny — I had to hit pause at the Pewdiepie reference until I could pull myself together — and has some good scares and clever ideas. Sometimes it’s just wrong.
Gore: Mildly moderate, periodically gross. A lot of time is spent staring up Shawn’s right nostril though. Nudity: Just a grown man in his underwear. Shudder
When Evil Lurks (2023): “Evil likes children, and children like evil.” The hot new thing from the director of the excellent Aterrados, When Evil Lurks has two men find that a neighbor’s son is suffering from the worst case of everything I’ve ever seen. Help is enroute, in the form of the lower half of someone’s body, but this proves ineffective without an upper torso attached. The movie is very intense and very bleak — think a ramped up The Dark and the Wicked with more backstory. The plot hints at a greater and darker world out there, where “cleaners” use special tools (reminiscent of those used by one of the investigators in Aterrados) to deal with this type of horrific threat. Relentless and uncompromising, When Evil Lurks is not for the faint of heart, but director Demián Rugna continues to impress while making Argentina look absolutely terrifying.
Gore: Aplenty, sparing no one. Nudity: Some man butt. Shudder
submitted by Naudilent to horror [link] [comments]
The TL;DR The Blob: The rare remake that reaches the level of the original. The Pact: A perfectly fine ghost story with some added twists. Malignant: Brad Dourif plays Brad Dourif as Jigsaw, but with less fun and games. The Hallow: Alien + The Thing + Irish folklore + Cronenberg. Excellent movie. Host: Brilliantly done, it’s the ideal indie horror Covid lockdown film. Deadstream: Proving a horror-comedy can perfectly combine both elements. When Evil Lurks: The uncompromising new horror buffet you’ve heard about. Damn.
The Blob (1988): “But don’t worry, there’s no sex or anything bad.” The Blob stars a jock, a cheerleader, and a bad boy loner as the “about to be breakfast” club fighting it out against an ambitious jello. It only takes 15 minutes to get to the blobbening, which is quickly followed by something far more horrific: filling out hospital paperwork. The blob embiggens, but a weakness is found — Kevin Dillon’s hair extensions — setting up the epic finale, but what really sells The Blob is the humor, absent in the Steve McQueen led original. Just a fun popcorn flick.
Gore: Moderate. Nudity: None, despite having two Playboy Playmates in the cast. Trivia: James Wan was a fan of lead actor Shawnee Smith, which landed her a role in the Saw franchise. Rented from Amazon.
The Pact (2012): “She’s taking all the light.” Looking at the title has you wondering, “What was the pact?” Something involving Annie’s (Caity Lotz) deceased mother, something to come, or both? Disappearances, violent hauntings, and unfolding discoveries take up the first half of the film. Casper Van Dien plays a cop with a lot of free time on his hands to help our protagonist. Talk about a guy who likes to keep busy; his IMDB is insane, with everything from Starship Troopers to Sharktopus vs Whalewolf on his CV. It’s a less complicated tale than other “what was my family member up to before they died” entries like Hereditary and The Night House, but the story is its own, and it works pretty well.
Gore: Low. Nudity: Just a little jiggle. Easter Egg: The first two names on Annie’s laptop contact list are “Sheridan” and “Le_Fanu.” Tubi
Malignant (2013): “I’m gonna fix you.” Not to be confused with James Wan’s 2021 production. After losing his wife to cancer some months previously, Allex has chosen the most optimal medical treatment for his serious depression: serious drinking. A mysterous altruist with shaky conceptions of consent offers help via a multi-step program that includes stalking, implants, butterflies, mind control, murder, therapeutic extortion, and a cure. Maybe. The legendary Brad Dourif co-stars as driver of Allex’s “therapy,” but he can’t raise Malignant much above average. It operates on the level of a mild thriller, with few scares surrounding its themes of alcoholism going terribly wrong.
Gore: Moderately bloody. Nudity: None. Tubi
The Hallow (2015): “A book of fucking fairy tales.” Adam and Clare move to a rural Irish town where he’s to survey the local forest, which the locals believe to be populated by the wee folk. They soon learn that “wee” does not apply to the creature’s claws nor to how pissed off they are for Adam to be roaming their woods. With a movie like this, you immediately wonder how production will handle the “fairies.” In the similarly styled Unwelcome (2023), they go all in on puppetry to good effect, playing it seriously until the very end, when it goes full camp. The Hallow isn’t playing around though; the tone is as dark as most of the scenes, and Galadriel would shit herself if she saw the things of the forest. It’s thick with tension, psychological and body horror elements, and sticks the landing with only a little padding. If I have a complaint, it’s that the baby screams so damn much you’d think he’s auditioning for Babadook 2. Otherwise, a great story.
Gore: Some. Nudity: None. Amazon
Host (2020): “I’m gonna be smashed if we carry this on.” A movie about what happens when you’re not into tabletop rpg’s, which sustained my friends and I through lockdown very well. No, instead these folks decide to hold a séance, and even if you haven’t seen Host, you know how it goes. Filmed during the lockdown using iPhones attached to laptops, it’s a brisk, tension-packed flick that spends about 15 minutes getting going before the spooks fly. At just over an hour (the length of a free Zoom call back then), it wastes no time and delivers on the horror. Great little film.
Gore: Low but present. Nudity: None. Shudder
Deadstream (2022): “Alright, let’s hurry before I think it through.” Beleaguered internet stunt puller Shawn Ruddy pulls an all-nighter at a haunted house — and gets haunted. Joseph Winter channels a lot of Shaggy and David Rose (Schitt’s Creek) in his portrayal of brave-until-he-isn’t Shawn. It’s very funny — I had to hit pause at the Pewdiepie reference until I could pull myself together — and has some good scares and clever ideas. Sometimes it’s just wrong.
Gore: Mildly moderate, periodically gross. A lot of time is spent staring up Shawn’s right nostril though. Nudity: Just a grown man in his underwear. Shudder
When Evil Lurks (2023): “Evil likes children, and children like evil.” The hot new thing from the director of the excellent Aterrados, When Evil Lurks has two men find that a neighbor’s son is suffering from the worst case of everything I’ve ever seen. Help is enroute, in the form of the lower half of someone’s body, but this proves ineffective without an upper torso attached. The movie is very intense and very bleak — think a ramped up The Dark and the Wicked with more backstory. The plot hints at a greater and darker world out there, where “cleaners” use special tools (reminiscent of those used by one of the investigators in Aterrados) to deal with this type of horrific threat. Relentless and uncompromising, When Evil Lurks is not for the faint of heart, but director Demián Rugna continues to impress while making Argentina look absolutely terrifying.
Gore: Aplenty, sparing no one. Nudity: Some man butt. Shudder
2023.11.03 04:28 nghivo1401 Weird color when streaming Genshin Impact
 | Help me fix this please~ submitted by nghivo1401 to discordapp [link] [comments] |
2023.11.01 05:00 LiveMud2836 Mua điện thoại
 | Có ai đã mua điện thoại ở hhm chưa ạ, cho mình hỏi chất lượng dịch vụ như nào với. Chứ thời buổi này còn không đưa đủ thông tin trên web như này thì hơi lo. Tại thấy giá rẻ hơn các hệ thống khác mà mình chưa mua ở đây bao giờ. submitted by LiveMud2836 to vozforums [link] [comments] |
2023.10.16 09:46 ArtisticAd5251 Ban Tuyên Giáo đang chiêu trò gì với phim Đất Rừng Phương Nam
Bộ Phim ĐRPN ngoài vấn đề chất lượng nội dung, tranh cãi giữa cá bên về nguyên tác thì đang tồn tại nhiều nghi vấn khó lý giải Đầu tiên là việc xuất hiện Nghĩa Hòa Đoàn và Thiên Địa Hội : Tại sao khi kiểm duyệt lại qua loa dễ dãi nhưng sau đó chỉ 3 ngày sau khi mở chiếu, mới có quyết định yêu cầu làm rõ ?. Và cũng tức thì đoàn phim như đã chuẩn bị trước, có ngay một bản chỉnh sửa nhanh chóng để tiếp tục ra rạp đúng lịch trình https://nhandan.vn/chinh-sua-phim-va-loi-thoai-trong-dat-rung-phuong-nam-post777730.html Nhìn lại những vấn đề về kiểm duyệt rườm rà, rắc rối thì đây có thể là một sự chuẩn bị trước đó
Thứ hai :lùm xùm xung quanh việc trường Hutech tổ chức sv xem phim để lấy điểm rèn luyện, đã có bài báo lên tiếng nhưng chắc chắn rất nhiều sv vẫn sẽ xem phim và ko chỉ trường Hutech, mới đây lại một trường nữa có dấu hiệu thúc ép hs xem phim( hình dưới) https://baomoi.com/thuc-hu-sinh-vien-hutech-khong-xem-dat-rung-phuong-nam-bi-tru-diem-ren-luyen-c47214243.epi
Vậy có thể kết luận gì ? : Đây có thể là một sản phẩm tuyên truyền, bài xích thế lực người Hoa, khơi dậy tự hào dân tộc cho dân miền Nam đang chán ghét chế độ , sẵn tiện chấm mút, kiếm tiền cho các trường đang bị bóp nguồn ngân sách, phải tự chủ cho các khoản chi Với sự mát tay trong hai dự án trăm tỷ là " Bố Già " và " Nhà Bà Nữ" rất có thể Trấn Thành đang muốn thông qua bộ phim để lấy lòng chính quyền nhà sản, không phải chịu chung số phận phong sát như HL14
https://preview.redd.it/sq0tj3swoiub1.png?width=960&format=png&auto=webp&s=1d55d20c3bcea3d698fe3c15b088878ba76b2e51
submitted by ArtisticAd5251 to TroChuyenLinhTinh [link] [comments]
Thứ hai :lùm xùm xung quanh việc trường Hutech tổ chức sv xem phim để lấy điểm rèn luyện, đã có bài báo lên tiếng nhưng chắc chắn rất nhiều sv vẫn sẽ xem phim và ko chỉ trường Hutech, mới đây lại một trường nữa có dấu hiệu thúc ép hs xem phim( hình dưới) https://baomoi.com/thuc-hu-sinh-vien-hutech-khong-xem-dat-rung-phuong-nam-bi-tru-diem-ren-luyen-c47214243.epi
Vậy có thể kết luận gì ? : Đây có thể là một sản phẩm tuyên truyền, bài xích thế lực người Hoa, khơi dậy tự hào dân tộc cho dân miền Nam đang chán ghét chế độ , sẵn tiện chấm mút, kiếm tiền cho các trường đang bị bóp nguồn ngân sách, phải tự chủ cho các khoản chi Với sự mát tay trong hai dự án trăm tỷ là " Bố Già " và " Nhà Bà Nữ" rất có thể Trấn Thành đang muốn thông qua bộ phim để lấy lòng chính quyền nhà sản, không phải chịu chung số phận phong sát như HL14
https://preview.redd.it/sq0tj3swoiub1.png?width=960&format=png&auto=webp&s=1d55d20c3bcea3d698fe3c15b088878ba76b2e51
2023.10.11 10:40 dakhoahungthinhhanoi Yếu sinh lý : dấu hiệu, nguyên nhân và cách điều trị
yếu sinh lý là gì?
📷yếu sinh lý là một thuật ngữ được sử dụng để nói về tình trạng suy giảm, rối loạn chức năng tình dục tại phái mạnh với nhiều vấn đề như: ham muốn giảm sút, đau khi giao hợp, xuất tinh sớm, rối loạn cương… Thực tế, nữ giới cũng có khả năng bị yếu sinh lý, nhưng ở phái mạnh sẽ phổ biến hơn và xét về mức độ ảnh hưởng là nghiêm trọng hơn.📷
có khả năng bạn quan tâm:
- bệnh yếu sinh lý là gì? Có chữa được bệnh sinh lý yếu không?
- Địa chỉ khám cũng như điều trị yếu sinh lý uy tín tốt nhất tại Hà Nội
- Chi phí khám và chữa bệnh yếu sinh lý mất bao nhiêu tiền?
không chỉ tác động tiêu cực đến tâm lý, tình trạng này còn gây ảnh hưởng cho chất lượng đời sống tình dục, chức năng sinh sản hay hạnh phúc vợ chồng nếu kéo dài. Theo các chuyên gia, bệnh sinh lý yếu nam bao gồm các mức độ từ nhẹ tới nặng như dưới đây:
➡️ yếu sinh lý nhẹ
Các biểu hiện bệnh chưa thật sự đặc trưng, nam giới vẫn có kích thích trong “chuyện ấy”, quan hệ được thường thì nhưng mà “cậu nhỏ” khó cương cứng hơn, bắt đầu có cảm giác cơ thể mệt mỏi.➡️ bệnh sinh lý yếu trung bình
nam giới có biểu hiện suy giảm kích thích khả năng tình dục, dương vật cần nhiều thời gian để cương cứng song lại không duy trì được lâu, kèm theo đó là hiện tượng xuất tinh sớm, quan hệ khó hài lòng, khó “lên đỉnh”.➡️ bệnh sinh lý yếu nặng
Người bệnh đã mất hẳn kích thích ham muốn tình dục, không muốn gần gũi đối phương, dương vật rất khó cương hoặc không thể cương cứng để quan hệ.Nguyên nhân dẫn đến bệnh sinh lý yếu tại phái mạnh
Theo các chuyên gia phòng khám nam khoa Hưng Thịnh, tình trạng bệnh yếu sinh lý có thể xuất phát từ nhiều nguyên nhân khác nhau, bao gồm cả nguyên nhân nội sinh và ngoại sinh. Cụ thể là:tuổi tác
Đây là nguyên nhân trước hết gây ra tình trạng giảm ham muốn tình dục tại phái mạnh. Theo thời gian, hormone sinh dục nam là testosterone và nitric oxide (là một hợp chất tham gia vào quá trình cương cứng) sau độ tuổi 30 đã bắt đầu suy giảm. Việc này không chỉ ảnh hưởng tới sức khỏe gây ra các bệnh lý toàn thân của phái mạnh cũng như còn tác động tới vận động tình dục của đàn ông, gây suy giảm kích thích, rối loạn cương dương, xuất tinh sớm…Mắc bệnh lý về chuyển hóa
Các bệnh lý như béo phì, rối loạn lipid máu, đái tháo đường, huyết áp cao… sẽ có tác động không nhỏ tới sinh lý. Ngoài ra, các bệnh lý như teo tinh hoàn, ung thư tinh hoàn, ung thư dương vật… cũng tác động trực tiếp đến phong độ phòng the của đàn ông.Các loại tiểu phẫu hoặc bẩm sinh về cấu tạo khu vực xương chậu, tủy sống sẽ tác động đến mạch máu cũng như dây thần kinh tại dương vật bị thương tổn.
Tác dụng phụ của thuốc
Việc sử dụng một số loại thuốc như thuốc an thần, thuốc chống trầm cảm, thuốc hạ huyết áp, một số loại thuốc lợi tiểu... Có khả năng là nguyên nhân gây nên tình trạng yếu sinh lý.khẩu phần ăn uống nghèo nàn, thường xuyên sử dụng chất kích thích khả năng tình dục như: cà phê, thuốc lá, ma túy… cũng ảnh hưởng đến khả năng sinh lý của nam giới.
Sinh hoạt không điều độ
Thói quen ít vận động, lạm dụng quan hệ tình dục, thường xuyên tự sướng sẽ khiến dương vật vận động đối với tần suất cao, xuất tinh liên tục, gây ra tình trạng xuất tinh sớm, thậm chí có nguy cơ liệt dương.Tâm lý căng thẳng
Thường xuyên chịu áp lực, mỏi mệt, sang chấn tâm lý… ảnh hưởng tới ham muốn, chất lượng tinh trùng. Vì lúc ấy, cơ thể sẽ sản xuất ra hormone steroid, hormone này sẽ ức chế quá trình sản xuất testosterone nội sinh, trì hoãn việc sản xuất tinh trùng ở đàn ông.dấu hiệu của sinh lý yếu ở phái mạnh
Mỗi người bệnh đối với tình trạng, mức độ nặng nhẹ khác nhau mà biểu hiện bệnh yếu sinh lý cũng sẽ không hoàn toàn không khác nhau. Nhưng mà, những biểu hiện rõ ràng có thể kể đến như:kích thích khả năng tình dục tình dục bị suy giảm
biểu hiện qua việc phái mạnh mất đi hứng thú với đối phương, không suy nghĩ về chuyện tình dục, không có cảm giác kể cả khi đang “yêu”, thậm chí là chỉ “trả bài” cho đúng nghĩa vụ hoặc né tránh, ngại quan hệ.
Rối loạn cương dương
Người mắc chứng sinh lý yếu cũng gặp khó khăn trong khi cương cứng, thời gian cương cứng không kéo dài được lâu, mức độ cương chưa đủ cho vận động tình dục. Nặng hơn là “cậu nhỏ” không thể cương cứng dù đã thử nhiều cách kích thích ham muốn khác nhau (liệt dương).
Rối loạn xuất tinh
Phổ biến nhất là xuất tinh sớm khi mới quan hệ được 2 - 3 phút hoặc chưa kịp thâm nhập vào trong âm đạo đã xuất tinh. Mặt khác người bệnh cũng có thể bị xuất tinh ngược dòng, khó xuất tinh, không xuất tinh được…
Cảm giác đau khi quan hệ
biểu hiện bệnh sinh lý yếu tại đàn ông cũng được nhận ra qua tình trạng đau dương vật khi cương cứng và quan hệ dẫn tới mất đi khoái cảm, kèm theo đau khi xuất tinh, có khả năng bị bệnh tiểu buốt, tiểu đau rát.
Xuất tinh tuy nhiên không hài lòng
Thêm một dấu hiệu sinh lý yếu nam phổ biến khác chủ yếu là thời gian cực khoái chỉ rất ngắn, hoặc một tỷ lệ đấng mày râu không có khoái cảm, không nhận thấy sự thỏa mãn mặc dù đã xuất tinh.
Một số biểu hiện khác
Bên cạnh những triệu chứng bệnh yếu sinh lý như đã liệt kê, nam giới mắc phải tình trạng này trong thời gian dài còn có thể gặp phải một vài ba vấn đề khác như stress, mỏi mệt, rụng tóc, tâm trạng biến đổi thất thường…
Không nên giấu nếu bạn bị yếu sinh lý!
Khi phải đối mặt đối với tình trạng bệnh yếu sinh lý của mình hầu hết đấng mày râu đều tìm cách giấu bệnh. Song, nếu không được phát hiện hay trị liệu kịp thời có khả năng gây ra nhiều hệ lụy.Giảm chất lượng cuộc sống, đổ vỡ hạnh phúc gia đình: đàn ông khi cảm thấy không hài lòng đời sống tình dục cho đối tác sẽ càng ngày càng tự ti, ngại giao tiếp cũng như quan hệ. Điều đó sẽ làm cho cuộc sống hôn nhân gặp nhiều khó khăn, lâu dài sẽ làm đổ vỡ hạnh phúc gia đình.
Tăng khả năng vô sinh: Khi bị xuất tinh sớm, rối loạn cương dương hay bệnh yếu sinh lý thì dương vật sẽ không đưa vào âm đạo được Bên cạnh đó không thể kéo dài thời gian xuất tinh khiến cho tinh trùng không có khả năng gặp trứng, sẽ dẫn đến bệnh vô sinh.
Có chữa được yếu sinh lý không?
Thực tế, vì ngại ngùng nên nhiều đấng mày râu vẫn chưa cởi mở, chia sẻ tình trạng bệnh dẫn đến tình trạng trễ trễ trong lúc điều trị khiến bệnh càng thêm nặng. Bởi thế, yếu tố tiên quyết vẫn là sự quyết tâm của đàn ông.với những ảnh hưởng của bệnh sinh lý yếu, hầu hết đàn ông và cả những bà vợ cũng quan tâm “yếu sinh lý nam có khả năng chữa khỏi không”. Câu trả lời là yếu sinh lý ở đấng mày râu với sự phát triển mạnh mẽ của y học hoàn toàn có khả năng chữa khỏi nếu được chữa trị sớm và đúng phương pháp
nhưng mà, đây là bệnh nhạy cảm, đàn ông thường có tâm lý che giấu, không đi khám tự ý mua thuốc uống, làm nặng nề thêm vấn đề mình đang gánh chịu.
vì đó, khi thấy bản thân có biểu hiện yếu sinh lý mà không thể điều chỉnh được, đấng mày râu nên tới các chuyên khoa uy tín để được xét nghiệm, chẩn đoán và có phác đồ điều trị hợp lý nhất, phục hồi nhanh nhất có khả năng.
Điều trị bệnh sinh lý yếu hiệu quả tùy mức độ
Để biết phương pháp chữa bệnh yếu sinh lý thế nào hiệu quả, người bệnh nên đi xét nghiệm tại những Khu vực y tế, phòng khám nam khoa uy tín để được bác sĩ chẩn đoán hay tư vấn cụ thể. Đối với những trường hợp bệnh sinh lý yếu ở mức độ nhẹ, phái mạnh có khả năng cải thiện bằng cách điều chỉnh lối sống hợp lý, ăn uống đủ chất, dành thời gian nghỉ ngơi hợp lý cũng như tích cực vận động cơ thể, luyện tập thể dục thể thao. Còn khi tình trạng bệnh yếu sinh lý đã chuyển tới giai đoạn nặng hơn thì người bệnh sẽ cần tiến hành điều trị theo chỉ dẫn của bác sĩ, cụ thể:Điều trị bằng thuốc chữa bệnh sinh lý yếu
Sau khi xét nghiệm cũng như có kết quả, bác sĩ sẽ kê đơn các loại thuốc điều trị bệnh sinh lý yếu hợp lý đối với từng người bệnh khác nhau, công dụng giúp cải thiện khả năng cương cứng, tăng kích thích khả năng tình dục tình dục, hỗ trợ điều trị xuất tinh sớm… Một số thuốc thường được sử dụng bao gồm: Nhóm thuốc ức chế PDE5, thuốc xịt hoặc bôi gây tê tại chỗ, thuốc bổ sung hormone Testosterone, thuốc tiêm…, phải được dùng theo đúng hướng dẫn từ bác sĩ chuyên khoa. Nếu như người bệnh tùy tiện sử dụng thuốc sẽ làm bệnh nặng hơn hoặc gặp tác dụng phụ.Cách chữa bệnh yếu sinh lý bằng liệu pháp PLISSIT
PLISSIT là liệu pháp phục hồi chức năng sinh dục dành cho người bệnh yếu sinh lý do các vấn đề tâm lý gây nên. Nam giới sẽ chia sẻ cùng bác sĩ về vấn đề mà bản thân đang gặp phải, qua đó bác sĩ giúp bệnh nhân loại phá những yếu tố tâm lý gây ảnh hưởng tiêu cực đến chức năng tình dục, biết được những hành vi tình dục đúng đắn. Đồng thời, người bệnh cũng sẽ được chỉ dẫn kết hợp điều trị với các phương pháp khác nếu cần thiết.Liệu pháp 6 trong 1 điều trị bệnh sinh lý yếu
Phương pháp này có sự phối hợp của 6 bước điều trị chỉ trong 1 liệu trình, hợp lý với những người bệnh gặp vấn đề về chức năng cương dương. Bao gồm các bước sau đây:Tiến hành xét nghiệm, kiểm tra nhằm chẩn đoán tình trạng bệnh sinh lý yếu.
Sóng xung kích từ máy điện li giúp tạo lực hút đưa máu tuần hoàn về dương vật.
Áp suất chân không duy trì lượng máu về “cậu nhỏ”, tăng thời gian cương cứng.
Liệu pháp tâm lý giúp bệnh nhân giải tỏa căng thẳng, áp lực đang gặp phải.
kết hợp đối với thuốc điều trị nhằm nâng cao hiệu quả chữa bệnh yếu sinh lý.
Đánh giá khả năng hồi phục của người bệnh, chỉ ra biện pháp phòng ngừa quay trở lại.
Cách chữa sinh lý yếu bằng thủ thuật
chứng dài bao quy đầu, hẹp cũng là một nguyên nhân gây bệnh yếu sinh lý ở phái mạnh, và trong trường hợp này người bệnh sẽ được tiến hành thủ thuật cắt bao da quy đầu bằng phương pháp xâm lấn tối thiểu để khắc phục tình trạng. Trước khi làm thủ thuật bệnh nhân được gây tê nhằm tránh cảm giác đau đớn, Ngoài ra ỹ thuật này cũng có nhiều ưu điểm như thời gian nhanh chóng (hoàn thành trong khoảng từ 15 - 20 phút), vết thương nhỏ, sớm lành hay không gây biến chứng, không để lại sẹo không tốt ở cơ quan sinh dục, an toàn cho sức khỏe sinh lý, sinh sản.Khôi phục bản lĩnh nam giới tại đa khoa hưng thịnh
phòng khám đa khoa hưng thịnh là Địa điểm y tế chuyên kiểm tra cũng như điều trị các bệnh nam khoa, bệnh lây qua đường tình dục uy tín ở Hà Nội mà các quý ông có khả năng tín nhiệm. Phòng khám đã có giấy phép cấp vì Sở Y tế, hội tụ những y bác sĩ với năng lực chuyên môn tốt, giàu kinh nghiệm, đã từng chữa trị thành công cho nhiều ca yếu sinh lý từ nhẹ tới nặng. Các phương pháp điều trị yếu sinh lý mà phòng khám đang áp dụng đều là cách chữa tiên tiến, đặc trưng như tiểu phẫu xâm lấn tối thiểu, PLISSIT, liệu pháp 6 trong 1…hệ thống các máy móc cũng như thiết bị máy móc tại phòng khám được đầu tư đầy đủ, chất lượng hiện đại, mang lại kết quả khám chữa yếu sinh lý nhanh chóng, chuẩn xác. Khi đến đây, người bệnh được an tâm bởi mọi thông tin, hồ sơ cá nhân đều được bảo mật, nhân viên y tế giúp đỡ chu đáo, tận tình.
Các khoản chi phí khám, chi phí chữa bệnh yếu sinh lý luôn minh bạch, công khai đối với mức giá phải chăng hay có nhiều chương trình ưu đãi. Người bệnh có nhu cầu xét nghiệm dễ thực hiện đặt lịch hẹn trước, lựa chọn khung giờ từ 8h00 - 20h00 mọi các ngày trong tuần.
ƯU ĐÃI 2 in 1 ĐẶC BIỆT cho anh em khi đăng ký xét nghiệm tại bài viết này
❤️ KHÁM NAM KHOA đối với 9 danh mục chỉ 280K!❤️ Giảm 30% chi phí khi điều trị bằng tiểu phẫu!
yếu sinh lý luôn là nỗi niềm khó nói đối với các quý ông, đặc biệt nếu như không xét nghiệm hay điều trị kịp thời sẽ gây ra nhiều vấn đề ảnh hưởng về cả tinh thần, chất lượng cuộc sống hay khả năng sinh sản.
Hy vọng rằng bài viết chia sẻ sinh lý yếu là gì, nguyên nhân và cách điều trị yếu sinh lý Vừa rồi đã giúp cho đấng mày râu vận dụng, có thêm cho mình những thông tin bổ ích về bệnh để chủ động phòng tránh hoặc nắm được cách xử lý khi chẳng may gặp phải.
ở Hà Nội, nếu bạn đang phân vân trong việc tìm kiếm địa chỉ điều trị sinh lý yếu ở đâu tốt thì phòng khám nam khoa Hưng Thịnh sẽ là gợi ý đáng tin cậy. Được cấp giấy phép vận động từ Sở Y tế Hà Nội, phòng khám có đầy đủ điều kiện cần thiết để thực hiện thăm khám và điều trị các bệnh nam khoa.
mọi người cũng có thể tìm hiểu thêm về các dịch vụ y tế khác hay thông tin chi tiết về phòng khám qua bài viết Review đa khoa hưng thịnh nhé!
Nếu còn bất cứ gì thắc mắc cần giải đáp NHANH CHÓNG - MIỄN PHÍ hoặc đặt LỊCH KHÁM NAM KHOA SỚM, quý độc giả hãy để lại lời nhắn trên khung chat màn hình tới bác sĩ tư vấn nam khoa online hoặc gọi đến HOTLINE của phòng khám để được hỗ trợ NGAY BÂY GIỜ nhé!!!
2023.09.27 09:50 ComplexYou9340 Huong dan cach tai game bai 68 ve dien thoai IOS/Android cuc ky nhanh chong
Trang web 68 game bài là một địa chỉ uy tín và chất lượng cho các người chơi cá cược. Đây là nơi bạn có cơ hội trải nghiệm nhiều tựa game thú vị và có thể nhận thưởng lớn. Bạn muốn biết cách tải game bài 68 về điện thoại? Hãy đọc bài viết qua đường link sau để có câu trả lời chi tiết: https://139.180.187.213/tai-game-68gamebai/
#68gamebai #68_game_bai #gamebaidoithuong #68gamebaione
submitted by ComplexYou9340 to u/ComplexYou9340 [link] [comments]
#68gamebai #68_game_bai #gamebaidoithuong #68gamebaione
2023.09.26 18:48 AndroidTrends LIVE images: Google Pixel 8 Pro in Black Obsidian
