Engliah historians were people indifferent to the execution of Walter Raleigh, in Tower Hill?
46-50
ArishMell · 70-79, M
Hard to know.
Executions were common and public in those days, attracting large but mostly only local audiences; but we might not really how widespread the knowledge of his execution and the reasons for it was, and the reactions to it.
News travelled only slowly and in fragmentary ways, in the 17C; there were no significant mechanisms for disseminating what we might call "public opinion".
So if many people were indifferent, they probably were so though genuine ignorance, not political opinion or sympathy.
Executions were common and public in those days, attracting large but mostly only local audiences; but we might not really how widespread the knowledge of his execution and the reasons for it was, and the reactions to it.
News travelled only slowly and in fragmentary ways, in the 17C; there were no significant mechanisms for disseminating what we might call "public opinion".
So if many people were indifferent, they probably were so though genuine ignorance, not political opinion or sympathy.
Jacko1971 · 51-55, M
I doubt anyone who wasn't in the nobility would know who he was.
ArishMell · 70-79, M
@Jacko1971 Well, and his ships' crews. I think you're right though, that only the nobility would really who he was and why he was executed.
Knowledge that he had been executed may have been more widespread, along with a vague comment about "treason" or some-such.
I don't know how well ordinary life including the breadth of political knowledge, was recorded at the time.
Knowledge that he had been executed may have been more widespread, along with a vague comment about "treason" or some-such.
I don't know how well ordinary life including the breadth of political knowledge, was recorded at the time.
