AVENUE VIET Forum Index AVENUE VIET
An Online Community
 
AlbumAlbum   FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 
The views expressed herein are the writers' own and do not necessarily reflect those of the webmasters, administrators and moderators of this forum. Refer to the complete disclaimer.
The "Richard III Is Innocent" controversy
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    AVENUE VIET Forum Index » Writers' Forum
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Kim



Joined: 01 Jan 2010
Posts: 272
Location: Wandering Around

PostPosted: Mon Oct 14, 2013 2:05 am    Post subject: History Reply with quote

I stay away from this Vietnamese site for years, come back and find a multinational site discussing an English King half a millenium dead! Interesting debate, though.

Quote:
I once came upon a definition of history as "the process by which complex truths are transformed into simplified falsehoods."

Good one. ten

History books are written by the victors. Nowhere is this more evident than in the case of Richard III.

Almost nobody remembers or even knows that he was the one to lay down the Justice is Blind (i.e. equal for everyone) principles, the presumption of innocence, forbidding the intimidation of juries, etc. It's hard to equate someone with a mindframe like that killing two innocent kids.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profileSend private message
Xuân Phong



Joined: 05 Mar 2005
Posts: 921
Location: All over the place

PostPosted: Sat Nov 30, 2013 4:09 pm    Post subject: Hopeless endeavour Reply with quote

If, after over 600 years and the evidence that came up, most people still think Richard III was guilty, the Richard III Society has its work cut out for it. They'll never rewrite history to give Richard his due. Sad but true. Richard will never be publicly rehabilitated. That's my considered opinion.
_________________
vroom
Back to top
View user's profileSend private messageYahoo Messenger
Laurelluin



Joined: 04 Nov 2011
Posts: 572
Location: Puget Sound

PostPosted: Sat Nov 30, 2013 6:24 pm    Post subject: Returning? Reply with quote

Kim wrote:
I stay away from this Vietnamese site for years, come back and find a multinational site discussing an English King half a millenium dead! Interesting debate, though.
...


Welcome (back), Kim.

I'm relatively new here, being a white American of North European descent.
_________________
In a ring of stone, on a plain of bone
The Oracular Stone
The never-empty cauldron
The Turning Tower
The three trials, The three Terrors
The Bard who plays the Night into Song
Back to top
View user's profileSend private messageAIM Address
inkling7
Admin Pro Tem


Joined: 01 Jun 2008
Posts: 6468
Location: Australia

PostPosted: Sun Dec 01, 2013 1:21 am    Post subject: Rewriting history? Reply with quote

The trouble is that Shakespeare miss wrote a lot historical stuff in his plays - not only about Richard but he also wrongly maligned Macbeth.... Hopefully the correct stories will be eventually taught I schools and the thinking will gradually change.. super grin
_________________
The Grumpiest Old Woman on Ave Viet.....
Back to top
View user's profileSend private message
ZeroG



Joined: 30 Dec 2009
Posts: 855
Location: USA

PostPosted: Tue Dec 17, 2013 3:08 pm    Post subject: Re: Rewriting history? Reply with quote

inkling7 wrote:
Hopefully the correct stories will be eventually taught I schools and the thinking will gradually change.. super grin

I'm dubious as to that. Every time there's a new "discovery", like Richard's bones lately, there's a brief hullaballoo about "rewriting history", but the noise dies down quickly. A few weeks later, nobody even remembers the new finds any more. School children still learn about the "wicked uncle", historic dictionaries and compendium still say, without any shadow of a doubt, that the Princes in the Tower were killed on the orders of the uncle who usurped the elder boy's throne. The Richard III Society's fight is hopeless in the grand scale, if you want my opinion.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profileSend private message
RavenStar



Joined: 21 Sep 2007
Posts: 672
Location: RavenClaw House

PostPosted: Fri Jan 24, 2014 12:08 am    Post subject: Re: Richard III Reply with quote

Roar wrote:
Shakespeare was a playwright. His "histories" are like those modern movies "based on true events". Their main purpose is to draw a crowd and entertain-- don't look to them for accuracy!

No, but unfortunately that's what stays in the public's mind.

Besides entertaining, he also had to write in a way that would make his Tudor masters happy.

Quote:
No one has ever been able to explain why, if Richard were guilty, he would have chosen to commit the murders so as to do himself the greatest possible harm.

Good question, but why hasn't the mainstream historian community asked it and followed suit? Why is Richard still the Wicked, Murderous Uncle? Say what you want about the Tudors, their PR was pretty good, and their slur campaign very successful.
_________________
"Wit Beyond Measure
Is Man's Greatest Treasure" (Rowena Ravenclaw)
Back to top
View user's profileSend private message
Emmanuel



Joined: 22 Dec 2009
Posts: 575
Location: usa

PostPosted: Sun Jan 04, 2015 2:23 am    Post subject: Re: Richard III Reply with quote

RavenStar wrote:
Quote:
No one has ever been able to explain why, if Richard were guilty, he would have chosen to commit the murders so as to do himself the greatest possible harm.

Good question, but why hasn't the mainstream historian community asked it and followed suit? Why is Richard still the Wicked, Murderous Uncle? Say what you want about the Tudors, their PR was pretty good, and their slur campaign very successful.

Out of curiosity I just looked up the French Robert2 Dictionary and there's no but or maybe about it. Richard III killed his nephews to usurp the throne, period. They don't even mention the doubts that have arisen, and the numerous historians and authors who tried to show Richard's innocence. Wikipedia is more circumspect, though, and mentions the Richard III Society.

I don't think poor Richard will ever really be found "not guilty". And there won't ever be an English king named Richard. That name has disappeared from British Royal genealogy.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profileSend private message
inkling7
Admin Pro Tem


Joined: 01 Jun 2008
Posts: 6468
Location: Australia

PostPosted: Sun Jan 04, 2015 4:07 am    Post subject: Richard III Reply with quote

Out of curiosity Emmanuel what makes you think the source you read was accurate? There are plenty of ifs and buts in various other sources and it now appears that Richard wasn't even a hunchback from his skeletal remains which proves the Tudor propaganda machine was rather successful and science may yet prove all the other allegations wrong.... And that is what they were - allegations from rather suspect claimants to the throne now apparently thanks to DNA testing... Heck the current British Royal Family may not actually have legitimate claims to the throne now...LOL super grin
_________________
The Grumpiest Old Woman on Ave Viet.....
Back to top
View user's profileSend private message
Wildflower



Joined: 03 Mar 2005
Posts: 6747
Location: Shuttling between France and the US

PostPosted: Sun Jan 04, 2015 4:53 pm    Post subject: Re: Richard III Reply with quote

inkling7 wrote:
Out of curiosity Emmanuel what makes you think the source you read was accurate? super grin

Julie, the Robert is, with the Larousse, one of the top dictionaries/encyclopediae in France. Robert 1 is for common names, Robert 2 for proper names. Every French linguist/translator or student has a copy, at least of the abridged version, which we call the "Mini-Bob" (coz in French it's called Le Petit Robert, LOL).

I have a very recent version, and Emmanuel is right. The authors just recopied what was in the earlier versions without checking for developments. But then the French don't care that much about English history, especially at 5 centuries' distance.

The hunchback thing is only in the Shakespeare version. It's obvious Richard couldn't have been a hunchback with a withered arm and still be the warrior he was. The hump isn't even mentioned in the French dictionary, just the "facts" that Richard killed the Princes in the Tower to seize the throne. Which we know is bullsh*t, taking into account the Titulus Regius Act of Parliament.

The Tudors were usurpers, but they won - and as everyone knows, history is written by the victors. Poor Richard! I don't think that for the general public his name will ever be cleared. When I told Seed that I believed him innocent, Seed was rather flabbergasted. He'd never heard of all the documents and research that came out. And Seed is a fairly well educated man. I'm sure if you ask any American, let alone any Frenchman, they'll give you the Tudor version without the shadow of a doubt clouding their thoughts.

Even here in this forum, Roar is sure of his guilt, as she posted earlier in this discussion.

And to think that his short reign was one of the most enlightened in English history! (institution of juries, no squeezing of the people "for the good of the King", a lot of liberal policies, etc.)

Poor Richard! Crying or Very sad
_________________
My Most Prestigious Award wink
Back to top
View user's profileSend private messageYahoo Messenger
inkling7
Admin Pro Tem


Joined: 01 Jun 2008
Posts: 6468
Location: Australia

PostPosted: Mon Jan 05, 2015 2:20 am    Post subject: Re: Richard III Reply with quote

i'm inclined to agree with you but the Tudors did the propaganda thing like professionals hence the defamation by Shakespeare who was told how to formulate his play by them.

However I don't think much emphasis is placed on the British monarchy in schools anywhere much in the world except for maybe the UK.... It is after all important of children to learn the history of their own countries first and then about the rest of the world but from what I have heard about the US educational system far too many children are ignorant about most things outside the US.

Poor Richard for being so maligned and blamed for most likely what the Tudors and/or their supporters did to the Princes. I think Royalty and the privileges that go with it are really outdated and people should not get these privileges due to the fact they were born into a certain family.... let them earn the like most other people have to... That also goes for politicians families and the families of the rich and famous people too.... super grin
_________________
The Grumpiest Old Woman on Ave Viet.....
Back to top
View user's profileSend private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    AVENUE VIET Forum Index » Writers' Forum All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7  Next
Page 6 of 7

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group