Posted on 02/17/2008 6:44:21 PM PST by blam
If Edward 2 didnt sire Edward 3 then who the daddy
Mel Gibson! Sheesh! Don't you know anything about history?
Mark
Actually I think he did, he was a French Adventurer, but if I recall he was actually killed out of the castle,by agents of ole’ Longshank.
It’s the Medieval Matthew Sheppard!!!
bookmark
I was referring to the descendants of Sir Hugh asking for reparations, not the descendants of Edward II—although I guess one could charge the government for it if the Queen wanted to? :-)
[Fwap!!] upside the head with a nerf baseball bat!! ;-)
Disemboweling could leave marks on the ribs behind the stomach, I suppose, but you don't have to cut into the stomach area that deeply to disembowel someone.
|
|||
Gods |
Thanks kalee. Just adding to the catalog, not sending a general distribution. |
||
· Mirabilis · Texas AM Anthropology News · Yahoo Anthro & Archaeo · · History or Science & Nature Podcasts · Excerpt, or Link only? · cgk's list of ping lists · |
“The present queen of Great Britain is a direct descendant of Edward II (assuming Edward III was actually his son).”
Exactly! The history of English monarchs is very interesting. I always enjoyed reading about the various intrigues involved.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Descent_of_Elizabeth_II_from_Cerdic
“He was hanged and...castrated...”
Beginning the old saying, “Balls,” said the Queeen. “If I had them, I’d be King.”
Maybe they put panties on his head, too.
Well.....I'm averaging about 40 pages a day.
So it will be a while before I get back to ya. :)
The best way to approach Braveheart is to assume up front that nothing in the movie is true, and work backward from that. William Wallace existed, and, well, that's about it for the movie.
It wouldn't be so bad but for the fact that the moron who wrote the screenplay (NOT Mel Gibson) has tried to insist that "hey, some of it could have been true!"
Great movie, lousy history.
Olive Hugh.
:)
It took me a while to get through that book as well. I started calling it “Book Without End.” Good read and after I was done, I started reading some non-fiction about that period of time (about the Plagues in particular).
Yes, young Edward II must have been 100% gay to be able to refrain from spending his entire life in bed with HER......
Spoiler Alert!
:)
GENEALOGY n. The tracing of descent from ancestors; alternatively, a particular account of such tracing for a specific individual or family. In the English-speaking world, all those who take up this pursuit announce sooner or later that they can trace their descent back to Edward III. This should surprise no one with a rudimentary knowledge of mathematics; there are probably one or two well-bred basset hounds who could also trace their descent back to Edward III. What is really surprising is that Edward III seems to be regarded as some kind of ultimate antecedent beyond whom the genealogist does not venture, even though anyone descended from Edward III is also descended from his father Edward II, and so on. The author can guess only that the prudery of the late Victorian age (when genealogy became a family pastime) chose to draw a veil before the memory of Edward II in view of the sybaritic Plantagenets bisexual reputation and appalling death (see impalement). Peter Bowler, The Superior Persons Book of Words.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.