Roger's Rapacity

Subject: Re: Roger's Rapacity Sun Jul 06, 2008 7:29 am

I confess I'm puzzled as to your presence here, Elflady. You have no interest in real debate, only in shouting at and insulting others, then calling it 'bullying' when it's turned on you. Why is it, exactly, that you come here and to my blog when so much of what I (and others) write makes you so furious? Why inflict it in yourself? 'True impartiality' will not make you happy; only a declaration that Mortimer was perfect in every way would do that. Why don't you start a blog and forum on him, so that you can write about his wonderfulness to your heart's content and don't have to read any opinions that disagree?

As Lady D said above, this thread has come to resemble flogging a dead horse.
_________________
"Sans lui n'estoit rien fait, et par lui estoit tous fait, et le creoit li rois plus que tout le monde." Without him nothing is done and through him everything is done, and the king trusts him more than any other: Hugh Despenser the Younger and Edward II

Joined : 28 Mar 2008 Posts : 152

I probably am way too late with this post - but things seem to have got very heated here.

Elflady - this is an Edward II forum - therefore Mortimer and Isa are not likely to be popular. Whatever Despencer did, he didn't depose Edward II. Whether Roger was a great soldier and supporter of the king early in his reign, the fact remains Roger had no right to depose him under the guise of Isabella's and England's saviour. IMO, his 'romance' with Isa was convenient and both proceeded to carry on where Ed and Despencer left off. Anyone in his position would have done that - they are all products of their time. Ed II was undoubtedly a failure as a king - but that doesn't mean people can't like him. Same with Mortimer - of course he did things that were wrong. His supporters will basically have to 'like it or lump it', as we say.

Might be incredibly simplistic what I'm saying - but I think it needs saying. It can be difficult to accept the faults of your favs in history - I sometimes take offence on their behalf LOL! - but accusing Mortimer of being greedy isn't really that bad, is it? I wouldn't have expected him to do anything else. My fav Gaveston foolishly didn't exploit his position enough. Not very nice of him to pocket Isa's jewellery etc, but I honestly couldn't imagine him NOT doing it.

Joined : 28 Mar 2008 Posts : 152

As for Ed's death - surely you must be pleased that Alianore - and certain historians - absolve Mortimer of regicide? I have definitely changed my mind on this subject. The red hot poker story is too good a story not to be repeated and then accepted as fact. Also take out of the equation of using comparative history, or in my case, identifying the weaknesses of it, and it seems Ed did survive.

Age : 38 Joined : 01 Oct 2007 Posts : 26 Location : Sydney

Wow...I haven't visited the forum for a while...Anejre is right. This thread had become very heated.

Elflady I am sorry that you do not like to hear 'bad' things about Mortimer from anyone on this forum. Alianore is correct when she suggests to you; NOT to read this forum as it is only likely to upset you.

Previously you have asked great questions and inspired excellent debate, but unfortunately this time you seem to have reacted very strongly to others who have also provided excellent debate, and despite what you think, they do clarify their sources.

Why don't you give Alianore a break? She is not trying to rubbish Mortimer, I am sure that is not her agenda. Differences of opinion are wonderful. Don't take the fact that some disagree with you so personally.