[TheRetiredBridgeburner]

Coco with marshmallows, on 13 October 2018 - 05:08 PM, said:

Well they could ignore the retcon and go for an actual Londoner/someone that can do a London accent

Get out!

Macros, on 16 October 2018 - 03:28 PM, said:

Morgy old chap let me clarify that statement further then.

History is written by historians. Who will either be chroniclers, and therefore more than likely employed by the victors, or historians using evidence and sources from the time. Which will, inevitably, be biased in the victors favour. How many of Julius's enemies wrote a battle report after the legions had trashed them? Not an awful lot.

Until we reach modern history (realistically post modern) everything that is reported is suspect due to the limitations on storage of information, literacy levels and good old fashioned slaughtering of one's enemies.

So whilst yes it is a grammatically flawed statement, it holds up in the broad view of its meaning surely?

^^ That. The Plantagenet and Tudor eras are my favourites, and they're a great example of that. Everything written with a slant from Wars of the Roses onwards is suspect, because whoever is chronicling is heavily affected by the regime they are writing under.

[Coco with marshmallows]

TheRetiredBridgeburner, on 16 October 2018 - 05:32 PM, said:

Coco with marshmallows, on 13 October 2018 - 05:08 PM, said:

Well they could ignore the retcon and go for an actual Londoner/someone that can do a London accent

Get out!

Macros, on 16 October 2018 - 03:28 PM, said:

Until we reach modern history (realistically post modern) everything that is reported is suspect due to the limitations on storage of information, literacy levels and good old fashioned slaughtering of one's enemies.

So whilst yes it is a grammatically flawed statement, it holds up in the broad view of its meaning surely?

^^ That. The Plantagenet and Tudor eras are my favourites, and they're a great example of that. Everything written with a slant from Wars of the Roses onwards is suspect, because whoever is chronicling is heavily affected by the regime they are writing under.

First, don't shoot the messenger, just a suggestion

As to the later part, agree with Macros Giant Hands. Look at the treatment of Richard 3rd, which is far more influenced by the play of Shakespeare (and therefore written with a significant nod to the then current monarch, a Tudor) than actual historical fact.

[TheRetiredBridgeburner]

Coco with marshmallows, on 16 October 2018 - 07:59 PM, said:

First, don't shoot the messenger, just a suggestion

As to the later part, agree with Macros Giant Hands. Look at the treatment of Richard 3rd, which is far more influenced by the play of Shakespeare (and therefore written with a significant nod to the then current monarch, a Tudor) than actual historical fact.

Haha, I jest!

As an aside, I'm reading David Baldwin's Richard III at the moment - cracking read if you are interested in the period (and takes a lot of account of contemporary biases as well).

This post has been edited by TheRetiredBridgeburner: 17 October 2018 - 08:05 AM