Re: Juliane Fitz Maurice, wife of Thomas de Clare, was not the daughter of Emeline Longespée

Cross postings removed.

"Douglas Richardson" <royalancestry@xxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:fe1d5d18-a753-41f5-9939-585f7a5e2b54@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

<blather snipped>

Likewise, I'm about to post new evidence in this matter. Like duh,
new evidence is important, "David."

Only as important as the subject - and nowhere near as portentous in this
case as the pathetic teaser suggests.

<snip of more smarmy hypocrisy.

P.P.S. Another misrepresentation that "David" told in his post is
that the identity of Juliane Fitz Maurice's mother has been available
"since the last century." I assume he means about the year 2000
(truly an ancient date), which is approximately when I first published
my research findings about Juliane Fitz Maurice. This is not exactly
"the last century."

Um, 2000 is "exactly the last century" - more trouble Richardson is having
with the calendar. The last year of the 20th century was not in the 21st, as
we now are. Count out the years if you must, and if you can, from 1 to 2000.
A century is 100 years complete, not 99.

Peter Stewart


.