4 ms·
People have been speculating about who murdered the Princes In The Tower for hundreds of years. Why isn't that considered "distasteful"? What's so wrong with tr
by denton-scratch 5y ago
People have been speculating about who murdered the Princes In The Tower for hundreds of years. Why isn't that considered "distasteful"? What's so wrong with trying to throw new light on old mysteries? Isn't that why there are historians?
- watwut 5y ago> Isn't that why there are historians? No, historians are not there to speculate, make up stuff and then act overconfident.
- rsynnott 5y agoI think time makes a difference there, along with the general character of the people involved. "Twenty generations back one of your ancestors killed some children" isn't likely to be particularly concerning to anyone, particularly when most of the obvious candidates are documented to have done far worse than that anyway. Accusing someone's grandparent of a heinous crime to sell a book is a bit different, and, well, I mean, nothing's stopping you doing it, it's _legal_, but unless you can prove it (as they appear to have failed to), people aren't going to be too thrilled about it. Like, this wasn't a sober academic paper, it was a mass-market pop-history book.
- denton-scratch 5y agoWell, I think that's being hypersensitive. [Edit] I don't mean you, rsynnott. My father fought for the British Army in Malaya. I'm not campaigning for the suppression of information about the crimes the brits committed there. Among my ancestors are people who were in the cotton business, in Liverpool; the ships went from Liverpool (manufactured goods) to the Gold Coast of Africa (sell goods, pick up slaves) to American colonies (sell slaves, buy cotton), and back to Liverpool. I'm not campaigning to block that information either.