thePeerage.com Forum Index thePeerage.com
A genealogical survey of the nobility of Great Britain and Europe
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

Richard Crookback???

 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    thePeerage.com Forum Index -> Guest Book and Feedback
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
scarletsweb
'Knight'


Joined: 11 May 2005
Posts: 1
Location: www.geocities.com/teachr14206/index.htm

PostPosted: Wed May 11, 2005 3:49 pm    Post subject: Richard Crookback??? Reply with quote

This is a fabulous site with tons of info, but c'mon, is this the Dark Ages? Richard Crookback for Richard III in the index? Are you an aficianado of Sir Thomas More, perchance? FYI...Richard III was NOT universally hated by the English people; in fact, far from it, he was quite revered. There was no contemporary outcry regarding the Princes in the Tower. An unsuccessful rebellion with the Woodville stamp upon it, headed by Dorset, failed because they were unable to rally the general populace to take up arms against Richard. At no point did the rebels so much as mention the Princes in order to drum up support. Richard's claim to the throne was NOT spurious; he was the next adult Yorkist male in line for the crown. Warwick, a minor & son of Richard's older brother Clarence, had been attainted. Titulus Regius had disinherited the Princes & their sisters. His claim was extremely valid & sound, & he was also the most competent heir for the job at that moment in time. He was a proven military leader, an able administrator, a legal visionary, & had at any rate been left in Edward IVs will as Protector of the Realm, regardless. It was the Tudor claim that was "spurious" & required the legitimization of such by marriage with Elizabeth of York & the repeal & attempted destruction of all extant copies of Titulus Regius. Henry VII claimed his throne by right of conquest, not heredity, being from the wrong side of the blanket as his ancestry was. It's been a generally accepted view of historians for literally a few hundred years that Richard III is not guilty of the crimes attributed to him by the Tudor propaganda machine of More, Morton, & Vergil. I don't see you labeling any other royal in this fashion; there's no Charles I the Big Stupidhead LOL for example, no Crazy Henry VI, no Bluebeard Henry VIII, not even a Bloody Mary to be seen here. You're propagating a myth.
_________________
Scarlet
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Sponsor
darryl
the Administrator


Joined: 01 Jan 1970
Posts: 1159
Location: Wellington, New Zealand

PostPosted: Fri May 13, 2005 10:50 pm    Post subject: Richard Crookback Reply with quote

Scarlet

A very empassioned plea for recognition for Richard III !

I add all the nicknames I come across for people in the database (so when I spot a Charles I 'the Big Stupidhead' I'll add it too!).
My software then takes each name in the database and adds it to the index - so Richard is also indexed under Richard III Plantagenet and King Richard III of England, 'Old Dick' and Duke of Gloucester.

Hope this works for you.

Regards
Darryl
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    thePeerage.com Forum Index -> Guest Book and Feedback All times are GMT + 12 Hours
Page 1 of 1

 
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 © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group