Other traditional "portraits"
SnakRichard III
Bliv bruger af LibraryThing, hvis du vil skrive et indlæg
Dette emne er markeret som "i hvile"—det seneste indlæg er mere end 90 dage gammel. Du kan vække emnet til live ved at poste et indlæg.
1myshelves
Has the study of the life and reign of Richard led anyone to question or investigate any other long-standing views of history, or the traditional "portraits" of any other historical figures?
I'd already done a major research paper on events leading to Benedict Arnold's decision to switch allegiance to the British, so wasn't at all surprised when I learned that Richard had been mailgned. I've heard people argue that "bad" King John also got a bum rap.
Do you now question all traditional historical accounts, and the designation of the players as heroes or villains?
I'd already done a major research paper on events leading to Benedict Arnold's decision to switch allegiance to the British, so wasn't at all surprised when I learned that Richard had been mailgned. I've heard people argue that "bad" King John also got a bum rap.
Do you now question all traditional historical accounts, and the designation of the players as heroes or villains?
2lquilter
i was thinking this would be an interesting topic for a group: history revised. dedicated to picking out long-standing errors or confusions (or mysteries) and discussing, citing, etc. a thread on Richard III. The historical Arthur. Shakespeare? various literary hoaxes. The idea that there were no women warriors in central asia 3000 years ago. etc.
3LucasTrask
myshelves wrote:
I'd already done a major research paper on events leading to Benedict Arnold's decision to switch allegiance to the British, so wasn't at all surprised when I learned that Richard had been mailgned.
myshelves, your research paper sounds quite interesting. Why do you think Benedict Arnold was maligned? By who? Is your paper available to read?
lquilter wrote:
i was thinking this would be an interesting topic for a group: history revised. dedicated to picking out long-standing errors or confusions (or mysteries) and discussing, citing, etc. a thread on Richard III. The historical Arthur. Shakespeare? various literary hoaxes. The idea that there were no women warriors in central asia 3000 years ago. etc.
lquilter, did you ever create a history revised group? I agree that it could be quite interesting as long as there was group participation.
I'd already done a major research paper on events leading to Benedict Arnold's decision to switch allegiance to the British, so wasn't at all surprised when I learned that Richard had been mailgned.
myshelves, your research paper sounds quite interesting. Why do you think Benedict Arnold was maligned? By who? Is your paper available to read?
lquilter wrote:
i was thinking this would be an interesting topic for a group: history revised. dedicated to picking out long-standing errors or confusions (or mysteries) and discussing, citing, etc. a thread on Richard III. The historical Arthur. Shakespeare? various literary hoaxes. The idea that there were no women warriors in central asia 3000 years ago. etc.
lquilter, did you ever create a history revised group? I agree that it could be quite interesting as long as there was group participation.
4lquilter
I didn't, actually, and haven't seen anything quite like it, either. Feel free to take it up! I'll join.
5lquilter
... I'm on a Richard III kick, and re-reading this I decided, what the heck, I'll start the group. "History, Revised", at http://www.librarything.com/groups/historyrevised
cheers!
cheers!
6amy2011
For myself a few years ago I started reading about the war of the roses.That led me to read about all the other kings and queens of engand that I could such as richard III.My favorite that I know is an unpopular king in english history to most people is henry the VIII.I can not get enough about henry. I personaly think henry was so much more than what people see him as today as are most people.
