Article about the fire
ML
Thank you so much for that information. But you know it just adds to
my confusion.
After reading the last bit in ABOSAA about the printing mistake, which
says that it really happend in December 1776 not January 1776 I
supposed that the article had to be written sometime after the
December 1776 fire. So either the last few days of 1776 or early 1777.
We know they are not dead in the December 1776 fire, and that they
plan to go back to Scotland to get his printing press. Also that the
note in the box was written on December 31st 1776 so I am lost. In
reading the books through the second time I found a bunch of errors
and I am wondering if this is one too?
Anyone have an idea?
Mary Lou
Alida Spry
I think I'm confused too! I don't quite understand your question but I'll
give it a go. ;-)
The fire happened in December, the article was written and submitted to the
printer in January and was finally printed and appeared in the paper in
February. The article stated the fire occurred in January only because the
printer was missing the word December from that font type.
It has nothing to do with Jamie's printing press. Yes, he plans to go get
his press but to my knowledge, he hasn't left yet. The book never says who
the printer was but it was not Jamie.
The note on the box was written to let Brianna and Roger know that they did
not die in the fire, as the article stated, because they would have had no
way of knowing that the article was wrong. When Brianna and Roger
originally found that article, they both stopped searching for Jamie because
they logically believed that he and Claire had died. I suspect that if they
had kept searching, they may have found Jamie and Claire somewhere in the
historic records up to the point of their actual deaths (which we don't yet
know about).
Does that help?
What other errors have you found?
Alida
"ML" <Blue...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1181663625....@z28g2000prd.googlegroups.com...
Colleen Lill
>
> The note on the box was written to let Brianna and Roger know that they
> did not die in the fire, as the article stated, because they would have
> had no way of knowing that the article was wrong. When Brianna and Roger
> originally found that article, they both stopped searching for Jamie
> because they logically believed that he and Claire had died. I suspect
> that if they had kept searching, they may have found Jamie and Claire
> somewhere in the historic records up to the point of their actual deaths
> (which we don't yet
know about).
When Brianna and Roger found that article about J & C dying the fire, they
found the article separately, at different times. It was my understanding
and interpretation that Brianna decided to go back to find J & C and warn
them about the fire/article. Roger went back after Brianna, with a similar
intention in mind. I never thought that Brianna and Roger stopped looking
for J & C.
I just finished re-reading Drums, so it's all still fairly fresh in my mind.
Have re-read the first 3 wee buiks numerous times (can't remember now many
times), but Fiery Cross only a couple of times and ABOSAA only the once. Am
looking forward to getting back to ABOSAA!
Colleen
Alida Spry
"Colleen Lill" <sass...@removethisshaw.ca> wrote in message
news:Ergdi.34132$NV3.20014@pd7urf2no...
>
>>
>> The note on the box was written to let Brianna and Roger know that they
>> did not die in the fire, as the article stated, because they would have
>> had no way of knowing that the article was wrong. When Brianna and Roger
>> originally found that article, they both stopped searching for Jamie
>> because they logically believed that he and Claire had died. I suspect
>> that if they had kept searching, they may have found Jamie and Claire
>> somewhere in the historic records up to the point of their actual deaths
>> (which we don't yet
> know about).
>
>
>
> When Brianna and Roger found that article about J & C dying the fire, they
> found the article separately, at different times. It was my understanding
> and interpretation that Brianna decided to go back to find J & C and warn
> them about the fire/article. Roger went back after Brianna, with a
> similar intention in mind. I never thought that Brianna and Roger stopped
> looking for J & C.
>
Yes, but that's what I was trying to say. They both found that article
individually and they had similiar intentions (her's to try to save them and
his to save them and her). I believe that when they both saw that article,
they were so shocked and upset by the information it contained, that they
stopped their searches. Brianna immediately began planning her trip back in
time and Roger was putting off telling her what he'd found only to discover
what she had done and then he too was busy planning his trip back.
I don't think they had any reason to question that the article was
inaccurate so why would they spend time looking for Jamie and Claire in
later records? Also, I suspect that Jamie will start using his printer's
name again (Alexander Malcolm) and my thinking is that Brianna and Roger
probably wouldn't have thought to start looking for him under that name
again, let alone imagine that he would risk the return trip to Scotland.
> I just finished re-reading Drums, so it's all still fairly fresh in my
> mind. Have re-read the first 3 wee buiks numerous times (can't remember
> now many times), but Fiery Cross only a couple of times and ABOSAA only
> the once. Am looking forward to getting back to ABOSAA!
>
> Colleen
>
>
I've lost count of how many times I've read the first four and I know I've
read FC at least three times and ABOSAA twice. I might start the whole
thing again for the summer since I'll have more free time without all the
activities and concerts etc. that the kids usually have going on during the
school year.
We should try to have a at least one new discussion topic each week here.
It would be fun to hear everyone's thoughts, opinions etc.
Nice chatting with you,
Alida
cver...@aol.com
> "Colleen Lill" <sassen...@removethisshaw.ca> wrote in message
>
> - Show quoted text -
Do you suppose the printer of the article might have been Fergus?
Alida Spry
<cver...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1186103508.7...@x40g2000prg.googlegroups.com...
No, in the book it says the printer was Amos Crupp and Sampson, the new
printer's devil so it wasn't Fergus.
Alida