Encyclopaedia Britannica versus Astrid Essed/Astrid Essed wins!
Zo 18 December 2022 14:59 |
Astrid Essed |
72 keer bekeken |
0 reacties |
0 x aanbevolen |
Artikel voorlezen
ENCYCLOPAEDIA BRITANNICA VERSUS ASTRID ESSED ABOUT
THE SUPERIOR CLAIM OF THE HOUSE OF YORK ON THE THRONE/
ENCYCLOPAEDIA BRITANNICA CORRECTS A TEXT
SEE ALSO
READERS!
This you'll love!
Encyclopaedia Britannica corrected a historical fault they made, due to some
comments from your author, Astrid Essed!
However:
Although they changed it, it would have been nice if they
had mentioned me. Astrid Essed as the person who pointed them on this fact....
READ!
As you know, I've written a number of articles and comments [and posted
from other authors] about the Wars of the Roses
And writing those articles, I stumbled on Encyclopaedia Britannica, where
originally was written the following about a decisive episode
during the Wars of the Roses, that [in]famous Fight for the English throne
between the two Plantagenet branches of the Royal House,
the Lancasters and the Yorks.
Encyclopaedia Britannica wrote the following:
''''House of York, younger branch of the house of Plantagenet<http://www.britann ica.com/EBchecked/topic/ 463365/house-of-Plantagenet> of England<http://www.britannica. com/EBchecked/topic/700965/Eng land>. In the 15th century, having usurped the throne from the house of Lancaster<http://www.britannic a.com/EBchecked/topic/328992/ house-of-Lancaster>, it provided three kings of England—Edward IV, Edward V<http://www.britannica.com/EB checked/topic/179763/Edward-V> , and Richard III—and, in turn defeated, passed on its claims to the Tudor dynasty.''
LETTER TO THE ENCYCLOPAEDIA BRITANNICA
In a Letter to the Encyclopaedia Britannica I made clear,
that the term ''usurpation'' was wrong, since usurpation
means ''''illegal seizure and occupation of a throne.'' and it was no usurpation, since a long history preceded it and actually the House of
York, that took over the royal Power in 1461 after the
Battle of Towton, had a stronger claim
than the House of Lancaster on the English throne,
descending from Lionel
of Antwerp, the second son of king Edward III, in the female
line, while
the Lancasters descended from John of Gaunt,
the third som of king Edward III, in the male line.
I wrote about that to Encyclopaedia Britannica
''Although you call the overthrowing of the Act
of Accord an usurpation, to my opinion it is no
usurpation at all, since the Lancasters should not have to
be kings all along, due to the superior claim to the throne
of York, as the Lancaster usurpation of King Richard II.''
SEE FOR THE WHOLE LETTER IN WHICH I
EMPHASIZED THE RIGHT OF FEMALES ON THE ENGLISH THRONE
[THE HOUSE OF YOURK HAD A SUPERIOR
RIGHT ON THE THRONE THROUGH FEMALE DESCENT] ON THE
THRONE]
ENCYCLOPAEDIA BRITANNICA ACKNOWLEDGED THEIR
FAULT AND CHANGED TEXT FROM ''USURPATION''
TO ''OVERTHROWING''!
And you know what!
The Encyclopaedia Britannica acknowlegded their
fault and.....changed their text
Here was their reaction on my Letter:
''On Thursday, March 12, 2015 1:15 PM, ukcustomerservice <ukcustomerservice@britannica. co.uk> wrote:
Dear Astrid Essed,
Thank you for your e-mail.
Please see below the feedback from the Editorial Team regarding the feedback that you have given.
OK, we’ve made a couple of small changes to this article, based on the reader’s message. Here’s the description of the revision in the article history (http://www.britannica.com/top ic/653692/history):
“Changing ‘usurped’ to ‘overthrown’ to acknowledge the contention of the legitimacy of the York claim based on the ‘Mortimer Claim.’ Also mentioned the 14th century practice among the nobility of privileging heir-male claims over heir-general claims.”
Thank you for your e-mail.
Please see below the feedback from the Editorial Team regarding the feedback that you have given.
OK, we’ve made a couple of small changes to this article, based on the reader’s message. Here’s the description of the revision in the article history (http://www.britannica.com/top ic/653692/history):
“Changing ‘usurped’ to ‘overthrown’ to acknowledge the contention of the legitimacy of the York claim based on the ‘Mortimer Claim.’ Also mentioned the 14th century practice among the nobility of privileging heir-male claims over heir-general claims.”
''House of York, younger branch of the house of Plantagenet of England. In the 15th century, having overthrown the house of Lancaster, it provided three kings of England—Edward IV, Edward V, and Richard III—and, in turn defeated, passed on its claims to the Tudor dynasty.''
The revised article can be seen at http://www.britannica.com/E Bchecked/topic/653692/house-of -York.
Kind regards
Britannica Customer Service
If you can include any previous message history in your reply it will speed up the time it takes to reply.
We hope that this is of some help to you. If you require further assistance with this, please do not hesitate to contact us on 0800 282433 or +44 207 500 7843 for customers outside the UK.
Encyclopædia Britannica (UK) Ltd
Registered in England and Wales: Number 3830890''
The revised article can be seen at http://www.britannica.com/E Bchecked/topic/653692/house-of -York.
Kind regards
Britannica Customer Service
If you can include any previous message history in your reply it will speed up the time it takes to reply.
We hope that this is of some help to you. If you require further assistance with this, please do not hesitate to contact us on 0800 282433 or +44 207 500 7843 for customers outside the UK.
Encyclopædia Britannica (UK) Ltd
Registered in England and Wales: Number 3830890''
THAT WAS THEIR REACTION!
You can understand I was a little proud on that and see the
text about the House of York you can read now!
SEE TEXT ENCYCLOPAEDIA BRITANNICA UNDER NOTE 1
[NOTE 1, A]
And as an extra Source, under Note 1, my whole Correspondence with the Encyclopaedia Britannica
[B]
ENJOY!
ASTRID ESSED
SEE NOTE 1 AND CORRESPONDENCE WITH THE ENCYCLOPAEDIA BRITTANICA
OR