The Knights Templar
Shaun
fantasy in quotes because it is actually a science-fiction novel
involving several historical characters and events including Chaucer,
Dante, and the volcano Vesuvius.
What I am looking for is an adapted history without bias. There is
obviously a great deal of controversy surrounding this 'Christian'
sect, and the fur really flies when varying historical characters
involved with this group (Phillip, etc) are found to have their own
agendas. The recent revival of interest in the Templars, and including
the Masonic Order is equally as disturbing. I have elected to use 'The
Knights Templar' as the 'enemy,' or opposition of my novel,
incorporating it as the military branch of the Masonic Order, the
political body reserved for the Teutonic Knights. Yet I do wish to
incorporate real history into this story, and as such I am hoping to
appeal to the brightest minds here.
I do sincerely hope I am not opening a Pandora's Box. I know little
also of many of the other religious sects at the time. (I haven't even
dived into the history of the Ottomans yet!!)
Shaun Curran - M.A. - British language, literature, and history major,
suffering from Starving Artists' Syndrome.
^_^
Warren B. Hapke
: I am working on a 'fantasy' novel involving the Knights Templar. I put
: ^_^
Shaun, There is a lot of garbage written about the Knights Templar in
books like 'Holy Blood, Holy Grail' and 'The DaVinci Code.' From what
you've written, it sounds like your novel is tending in that direction.
If you want sober, historically accurate information on the Templars, I
would recommend Malcolm Barber's 'The New Knighthood.' You may find,
however, that incorporating real listory into the story will make it seem
duller than your competitors' and will require lots of changes to your
plot line.
Warren B. Hapke
wbh...@prairienet.org
William Black
"Shaun" <Shaun_...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1138818743.8...@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> What I am looking for is an adapted history without bias.
No such thing.
--
William Black
I've seen things you people wouldn't believe.
Barbeques on fire by the chalets past the castle headland
I watched the gift shops glitter in the darkness off the Newborough gate
All these moments will be lost in time, like icecream on the beach
Time for tea.
am...@hotmail.com
William Black wrote:
> "Shaun" <Shaun_...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:1138818743.8...@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>
> > What I am looking for is an adapted history without bias.
>
> No such thing.
And I thought that "The most modern view...." was completely
unbiased.... :-(
William Black
<am...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1138830980....@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
I will quote from EH Carr's seminal work, 'What is History?'
"The historian is necessarily selective. The belief in a hard core of
historical facts existing objectively and independently of the
interpretation of the historian is a preposterous fallacy, but one which is
very hard to eradicate."
and
History is... ...a dialogue between the historian in the present and the
facts from the past.
and
The status of a historical fact will turn on a question of interpretation.
This element of interpretation of history affects every fact.
am...@hotmail.com
Shaun wrote:
> I am working on a 'fantasy' novel involving the Knights Templar.
As it was said, there is no such a beaten to death subject which can't
be beaten
even further.... :-)
> I put
> fantasy in quotes because it is actually a science-fiction novel
> involving several historical characters and events including Chaucer,
> Dante, and the volcano Vesuvius.
Just out of a pure curiosity, Vesuvius qualifies as character or event?
>
> What I am looking for is an adapted history without bias.
You are in a just in the right place....
>There is
> obviously a great deal of controversy surrounding this 'Christian'
> sect,
Templars were christians (with no '') but they were not a sect. Do you
understand a
difference between sect and religious military order?
>and the fur really flies when varying historical characters
> involved with this group (Phillip, etc) are found to have their own
> agendas.
> The recent revival of interest in the Templars,
... Based mostly on the books filled with the wild speculations and
written for the
people who are too ignorant and too lazy to check elementary facts.
Like the _fact_
that Parisian Meridian is nowhere close to the Church of St. Sulpice:
its location is
clearly indicated by a big monument. That Maria Magdalena was not
exactly rejected
by Catholic Church (one of the biggest churches in Paris is one of
Magdalena),
that 'ashes of the Templars' were not thrown into the Tiber became they
had been
burn in Paris, that initiative was Philip's and not papal (and that at
this time popes
simply did not have enough of a military strenght to arrest the
Templars even if they
wanted to)., etc.
>and including
> the Masonic Order
Which had nothing to do with the Templars except the reference to the
Solomon's
Temple...
> is equally as disturbing.
Sure, in St. Sulpice they even put a plaque in English explaining in
some details the
idiocies written in 'certain popular book'. Probably all these
questions asked by the
visiting idiots were quite disturbing.
> I have elected to use 'The
> Knights Templar' as the 'enemy,' or opposition of my novel,
Sorry to tell you but certain Sir. Walter Scott already did this in two
of his books.
So, your idea is not really original....
> incorporating it as the military branch of the Masonic Order,
Isn't it a little bit of a contradiction with the ideals of universal
brotherhood, etc.?
> the
> political body reserved for the Teutonic Knights.
Why is it neccessary to write about the subjects you have absolutely no
clue about?
The Teutonic Knights were a _military_ order (just as the Templars)
with a clear-cut
beginning and end of its existence.
>Yet I do wish to
> incorporate real history into this story,
In this case, perhaps it would be benefitial if you start with reading
something serious
on the subject.
>and as such I am hoping to
> appeal to the brightest minds here.
>
> I do sincerely hope I am not opening a Pandora's Box.
You are not opening anything of the kind because so far you did not
offer anything,
which would make a slightest sense historically.
> I know little
> also of many of the other religious sects at the time. (I haven't even
> dived into the history of the Ottomans yet!!)
>
The Ottomans were NOT a religious sect!
But, in a purely humanistic attempt to make your research easier, here
is a free advice.
Search in this group for the posts with the titles like "The Most
Modern View on ....".
Also look for the texts which contain "Fried Templars".
:-)
celia
Like most of the rest of the Templars his life
was no doubt worthy and boring.
Celia
Renia
> Shaun wrote:
>
>>I am working on a 'fantasy' novel involving the Knights Templar.
>
>
> As it was said, there is no such a beaten to death subject which can't
> be beaten
> even further.... :-)
>
>
>>I put
>>fantasy in quotes because it is actually a science-fiction novel
>>involving several historical characters and events including Chaucer,
>>Dante, and the volcano Vesuvius.
>
>
> Just out of a pure curiosity, Vesuvius qualifies as character or event?
>
>
>>What I am looking for is an adapted history without bias.
>
>
> You are in a just in the right place....
>
>
>>There is
>>obviously a great deal of controversy surrounding this 'Christian'
>>sect,
>
>
> Templars were christians (with no '') but they were not a sect. Do you
> understand a
> difference between sect and religious military order?
>
>
>
>>and the fur really flies when varying historical characters
>>involved with this group (Phillip, etc) are found to have their own
>>agendas.
>>The recent revival of interest in the Templars,
>
>
> .... Based mostly on the books filled with the wild speculations and
Did you notice this on the end of his original post?
> Shaun Curran - M.A. - British language, literature, and history major,
> suffering from Starving Artists' Syndrome.
I'm intrigued with the MA in British language. What is this "British"
language? And a history major with so little knowledge of the workings
of history?
Hmm
Shaun
one comment at a time. No, Vesuvius is an event, not a character. My
apologies for my rapid writing earlier; I only had a little time on my
lunch break. I think the concept of sect comes from my understanding
that they have been 'revived' as part of the Masonic Order. With its
disbanding in the early part of the fourteenth century, and the charges
of heresy and homosexuality surrounding it, I was not certain if I
should indeed call it a Christian order or not. What with the
understanding that many of the battles the Templar and Teutonic Order
knights fought in have turned out to be absolute massacres (Terry Jones
wrote an interesting book entitled 'Chaucer's Knight', which explores
this 'mercenary.') I see that you mention the 'DaVinci Code'; I have
stayed away from this particular book because it seems so
controversial.
I think I should start with a rather elementary examination of the
Templar in full, beginning with its creation. 'The First Crusade' deals
with the events leading up to its creation, am I correct, or have I not
done my homework?
As for my story, I chose the Teutonic Order and Knights Templar partly
based on heresay and not actual fact. I recognize this now as a
potential blunder, but not one that cannot be corrected.
Shaun
Shaun
actual major is indeed English, with a concentration on British
history, and the languages employed during its history, in particular,
the Old English of Beowulf, and the Middle English of Chaucer's time. I
am well aware French was the 'official' language until roughly the
middle of the fourteenth century (I chose to take a course on Latin to
initiate a 'contemporary' translation of Boece's 'Consolation of
Philosophy' as opposed to French, which I will undertake soon enough.')
As for language, which is the bulk of my study, the courses I have
taken range from Beowulf and the Gawain-poet (I never did read
Tolkien's translation, however) through Chaucer (did an interesting
paper on Chaucer's lost 'The Book of the Lion'), Milton, Swift, and the
British Romantics. From there I bounced back and forth between
Shakespeare and T.S. Eliot (Only because of his inspirations from
Dante). I have begun to branch out in my studies, not for any degree,
but for my own appreciation. I have obtained The Decameron, as well as
Virgil's The Aenid, and while I have yet to drudge through Ovid's
Metamorphoses, I am finding myelf growing increasingly interested in
the European history surrounding the history of the British Isles that
I have already studied. The Hundred Years' War I understand well
enough, and the Black Prince's plunge into madness, but I unfortunately
have isolated myself in this endeavor.
I am not writing this merely to impress, but to elaborate. I suppose I
have grown up reading Caxon's Le Morte D'Arthur too many times, and
spent too much time reading commentaries on Chaucer.
Shaun ^_^
Shaun
agree, real history, especially in fiction, tends to be on the preachy
side. There are quite a few history professors out there that are adept
at telling history, but have the uncanny ability to put their audiences
to sleep while doing so. I may sacrifice total accuracy for the sake of
plot, while nodding some way shape or form that I do indeed know the
actual history of the Templar.
Thanks!
Shaun
sca...@bigpond.com
Shaun wrote:
> I only had a little time on my
> lunch break. I think the concept of sect comes from my understanding
> that they have been 'revived' as part of the Masonic Order.
Various Masons have claimed various odd things about their gentlemens'
club, few of which are correct or can be taken seriously. Any claims
that the Masons are in any way connected to the Templars can be
politely described as 'total nonsense'.
> With its
> disbanding in the early part of the fourteenth century, and the charges
> of heresy and homosexuality surrounding it, I was not certain if I
> should indeed call it a Christian order or not.
It was definitely a Christian order, despite the slanders thrown at it
by its enemies.
> What with the
> understanding that many of the battles the Templar and Teutonic Order
> knights fought in have turned out to be absolute massacres
That doesn't change the fact that both the Templars and the Teutonic
Knights were Christian orders. We may find the concept of holy war
distasteful, but medieval people didn't.
> (Terry Jones
> wrote an interesting book entitled 'Chaucer's Knight', which explores
> this 'mercenary.')
Jones' book was highly entertaining, but riddled with flaws, errors and
leaps of logic.
> I see that you mention the 'DaVinci Code'; I have
> stayed away from this particular book because it seems so
> controversial.
There are other reasons to avoid it. It's also poorly researched and
some of the worst writing I've ever had the displeasure of suffering
through.
> I think I should start with a rather elementary examination of the
> Templar in full, beginning with its creation. 'The First Crusade' deals
> with the events leading up to its creation, am I correct, or have I not
> done my homework?
That's correct.
Vaughan Sanders
Caxon's Le Morte D'Arthur ?
Beowulf is West Saxon standard not the Northumbrian Ynglis for example,
then you would have to watch the p's and q's on anything written about the
Celtic languages, most of it is modern bollocks based on post conquest
manuscripts.
Jamie
Shaun
D'Arthur, which was written by Sir Thomas Malory (2 L's or 1?). The
other manuscript is called the 'Winchester' manuscript which I have not
yet read.
As for the use of the Templar as the chief enemy of my story, that is
only one subplot amongst many. I have elected to put that particular
segment on hold for now, opting to begin in the middle of the book,
where my characters enter what I call (for lack of a better name,
currently) 'The Dark Tower.' In this is the entrance to the Underworld,
and, you guessed it, one of the characters of this group is Dante
Aligheri, and his best friend is Geoffrey Chaucer. While Dante leads,
the main character, an 'Arthur' or 'Christ' of sorts, Jack David, is on
a mission to break open the gates of Hades to allow the great army
mentioned in the Book of Daniel to come to life. I have not worked ou
all the details just yet. I am striving for originality while paying
tribute to Dante and many other favorite authors of mine (I was going
to have a pilgrimage, but I decided that might be too much). The whole
concept of utilizing historical characters is inspired by Philip
Farmer's 'Riverworld' series, but I have opted to use an entirely
different set of characters. I am now studying the history of knights,
and a particular chapter of that is indeed the Templar. I picked that
particular name not because of my lack of imagination, but because it
seemed to be one most widely known. It appears this particular group
has enjoyed literary exhaustion, and I will pick another group which
perhaps has 'darker' ties.
Any ideas for this particular group?
No, there is no actual 'King Arthur' in my book, although there is an
organization of Knights that gather around a round table for meetings.
I am struggling not so much with historical inspiration or even the
plot - much off the work is already outlined - but rather, I wish for
my audience to recognize historical characters when they come across
them. At the same time I recognize there are many figures in history
that have been beaten to death - Vlad Tepes, for example, Vlad Dracula
- and should be avoided at all costs. But others, like Chaucer, whose
only link (that I am aware of) to media fame is in 'A Knight's Tale'
will be an easily recognizable figure, and he does provide the 'comedy'
relief throughout the book. I am at odds with myself whether or not to
use Tolkien as a character, not for his LOTR, but for his understanding
of Sanskrit languages. Same with Boccaccio and Milton; modern readers
may or may not understand who these characters are.
Language is another area that I am diligently studying for this work;
while there will be translators like Chaucer (who knew Latin and
French) and Dante (I don't know if he knew Greek fluently, but I am
going to take a risk and say he did, as well as Latin and Italian), I
will be utilizing Latin, French, Greek, and other languages as well, as
each culture has their own language, and I have borrowed for each
culture a recognizable language found in the modern as well as ancient
world. Being true to the Middle Ages, education for children,
especially those on more wealthy worlds, will consist of the Trivium,
the basics of which are laid out in 'Chaucer and the Trivium.'
Equally as challenging is constructing the cultures for this story.
Being a Christian and wishing to remain true to the themes of
Christianity, I have broken up the worlds of my story as being
followers of the 'Holy One' or not; those that are not are not
necessarily evil as much as they simply have a different worldview.
Miaka - that is, Germany - does indeed employ Nazi footsoldiers, but I
am wondering if this would be looked at as equally lacking in the
imagination department. Gibraltar is symbolic as the Jewish State, and
one major theme running throughout the story is the concept of
anti-semitism and the desire to see the Jewish State wiped off the map.
I have opted to employ modern cultures, that is, theory of such, and
the great gap that exists between the 'Western World' and its liberal
worldview (with conservative minority, or majority, depending on how
you wish to look at it) and that of classic civilizations such as
Medieval England or even Greek. There is a 'Constantinople,' if you
will, that remains the pivotal part of my story; this particular planet
falls, and when it does, the 'Holy One' followers fall ino a state of
panic, suggesting their faith was not as strong as they claim (which,
from my understanding, parallels the sentiments of Europe following the
destruction of the walls of Constantinople (which also, as many
scholars suggest, ended the Middle Ages)).
There are those here who feel I am somewhat of a dunce when it comes to
history despite my M.A., and perhaps this stems from a focus not on
history or literature at all, but this work of mine that started some
thirteen years ago. In fact, up until recently (2003?) I was not at all
interested in literature or even language, focusing the bulk of my free
time to science-fiction and fantasy novels. Thanks to a class on Homer,
my horizons expanded (not without protest from the part of me still
engaged in the fantasy world), but I still have quite a bit of catching
up to do. As for my interest in the Middle Ages, well, I took a class
on Chaucer and utterly fell in love with his works, particularly
'Troilus and Cryseide'.
Okay, enough! I can tell I am going to either recieve much harsh
criticism, or those participating in this group will put me out to
pasture, deeming me too strange to comprehend. One person here has
questioned my M.A. - if only because I minored in history as an
undergrad, and my vision of the world at the time is somewhat lacking.
The program I took, at National University, was a little lacking in
solid research, focusing instead on generalized genres (the British and
American Romantics, Postmodernism, etc). I have had to pick up the
slack.
Yours in history,
Shaun Curran
Alan Crozier
> Caxon was the publisher of only one of the two versions of Le
Morte
> D'Arthur, which was written by Sir Thomas Malory (2 L's or
1?). The
> other manuscript is called the 'Winchester' manuscript which I
have not
> yet read.
One l in Malory, one t in Caxton.
<rest snipped>
--
Alan Crozier
Lund
Sweden
am...@hotmail.com
William Black wrote:
> <am...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:1138830980....@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> >
> > William Black wrote:
> > > "Shaun" <Shaun_...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> > > news:1138818743.8...@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> > >
> > > > What I am looking for is an adapted history without bias.
> > >
> > > No such thing.
> >
> > And I thought that "The most modern view...." was completely
> > unbiased.... :-(
> >
>
> I will quote from EH Carr's seminal work, 'What is History?'
>
> "The historian is necessarily selective.
He is talking about a professional historian and I'm not. Which means
that "The most
modern view..." has a reasonable chance to be completely unbiased. :-)
[]
> History is... ...a dialogue between the historian in the present and the
> facts from the past.
Well, this is definitely not applicable because "....." has little to
do with the 'facts from
the past'.....
Renia
>
> Okay, enough! I can tell I am going to either recieve much harsh
> criticism, or those participating in this group will put me out to
> pasture, deeming me too strange to comprehend. One person here has
> questioned my M.A. - if only because I minored in history as an
> undergrad, and my vision of the world at the time is somewhat lacking.
> The program I took, at National University, was a little lacking in
> solid research, focusing instead on generalized genres (the British and
> American Romantics, Postmodernism, etc). I have had to pick up the
> slack.
>
> Yours in history,
>
> Shaun Curran
I wasn't questioning your M.A. itself, but the value of your studies in
history which you now say was lacking in historical research methods.
You admit to a long-held interest in fantasy and science fiction but
these are completely different genres to history or even to historical
fiction. You may find a clash between these genres. Something will
probably have to give.
am...@hotmail.com
Renia wrote:
>
> Did you notice this on the end of his original post?
Yes.
>
> > Shaun Curran - M.A. - British language, literature, and history major,
> > suffering from Starving Artists' Syndrome.
>
> I'm intrigued with the MA in British language. What is this "British"
> language? And a history major with so little knowledge of the workings
> of history?
"British language" as distinctively different from "American language"
would be fine
by me but the history part is annoying. Judging by his explanations,
'history' boils
down to a rather narrow set of the non-historical books (Brits and
couple "classics")
and, how original, the 100YW. Fine by me but why on the Earth he is
trying to
include subjects he has no clue about and, in an attempt to do so, gets
his knowledge
from a garbage can? (IMO, "Da Vinci Code" is weak even as a detective
story).
Of course, it can be argued that excessive knowledge can be
counterproductive for
a writer of historic fiction: author may try to put too many facts into
his/her book
and result will be anything but entertaining. Examples, off the top of
my head, would
be Merezkovsky (books about Julian, Leonardo, Peter the Great), Brusov
(Middle Ages
and Ancient Rome), Gore Vidal and all the way to Mary Gentle's "History
of the Trash"
(the 1st book looked like a manual on medieval armour and even explicit
sex and
numerous obscenities did not save it :-) ).
Of course, another extreme would be an old humoristic novel where
author was ordered
to write an adventure story and selected as a hero a "Senegaleze,
because I have
absolute and complete absense of any knowledge about this nation". :-)
As for "Starving Artist" part, the obvious advice is: "Get a job!"
William Black
<am...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1138888424....@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>
> William Black wrote:
> > <am...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> > news:1138830980....@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> > >
> > > William Black wrote:
> > > > "Shaun" <Shaun_...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> > > > news:1138818743.8...@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> > > >
> > > > > What I am looking for is an adapted history without bias.
> > > >
> > > > No such thing.
> > >
> > > And I thought that "The most modern view...." was completely
> > > unbiased.... :-(
> > >
> >
> > I will quote from EH Carr's seminal work, 'What is History?'
> >
> > "The historian is necessarily selective.
>
> He is talking about a professional historian and I'm not. Which means
> that "The most
> modern view..." has a reasonable chance to be completely unbiased.
No chance at all.
People writing about the past are influenced by the present.
Which is rather the point.
--
William Black
I've seen things you people wouldn't believe.
Barbeques on fire by the chalets past the castle headland
I watched the gift shops glitter in the darkness off the Newborough gate
All these moments will be lost in time, like icecream on the beach
Time for tea..
Shaun
science-fiction and fantasy. This does not mean, of course, I do not
enjoy classic fantasy, such as 'The Brothers Grimm's Fairy Tales,' or
some of the other whimsical entries by our ancestors. I agree, when it
comes to literature and history, there must be a balance. Going from
reading nothing but sci-fi to classic literature leaves you with a
slight disorientation, particularly when it comes to style. Reading
Dante's Inferno, among other things, and studying the more interesting
aspects of European History (The concept of French Revolution in Les
Miserables, 'The Historian' and its correlation to Romanian history,
etc) has flushed out the 'impurities', if you will, or the bad rap
science-fiction has given classic literature.
Shaun Curran
Shaun
As for "Starving Artist" part, the obvious advice is: "Get a job!"
Working on it! =)
S.C.
am...@hotmail.com
Shaun wrote:
> Hello! You really give me quite a bit to think about, so I'll take it
> one comment at a time. No, Vesuvius is an event, not a character.
How naive of me was to think that Vesuvius is a mountain! Its eruption
is an event but not Vesuvius itself.
> My
> apologies for my rapid writing earlier; I only had a little time on my
> lunch break. I think the concept of sect comes from my understanding
> that they have been 'revived' as part of the Masonic Order.
Masons (I'm not a specialist, but AFAIK there was/is no _unified_
"Masonic Order")
has nothing to do with the Templars. How could they be 'revived' by a
society which
preaches universal brotherhood and peaceful work? Not to mention that,
being a
Catholic religious order, they can be 'revived' only by Pope.
>With its
> disbanding in the early part of the fourteenth century, and the charges
> of heresy and homosexuality surrounding it, I was not certain if I
> should indeed call it a Christian order or not.
They were disbanded on accussations of heresy, etc. most of which were
too clearly
political to be taken seriously. But the fact that the order was
disbanded by Pope
tells that it was a _Catholic_ order. BTW, AFAIK, after it was
disbanded, many
former members joined other military orders, which tells that the
contemporaries did
not took all these accussations too seriously.
> What with the
> understanding that many of the battles the Templar and Teutonic Order
> knights fought in have turned out to be absolute massacres (Terry Jones
> wrote an interesting book entitled 'Chaucer's Knight', which explores
> this 'mercenary.')
Neither Templars nor Teutonic knights were mercenaries. As for the
massacres,
I'm not sure what this have to do with anything.
> I see that you mention the 'DaVinci Code'; I have
> stayed away from this particular book because it seems so
> controversial.
>
It is an adventure story and there are numerous similar stories built
around some
religious issue. It is just that by some reason too many people decided
to take
this one seriously.
> I think I should start with a rather elementary examination of the
> Templar in full, beginning with its creation. 'The First Crusade' deals
> with the events leading up to its creation, am I correct, or have I not
> done my homework?
>
I did not read the book you are referencing to but the Order was
established in
1118 and confirmed by Pope in 1128. It's Rule was dictated by
St.Bernard.
> As for my story, I chose the Teutonic Order and Knights Templar partly
> based on heresay and not actual fact. I recognize this now as a
> potential blunder, but not one that cannot be corrected.
I have no clue what you are planning to say about Teutonic Order so it
is hard to
me to make any comment on this subject.
Madra Dubh
<am...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1138832756....@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
<Snip>
> Also look for the texts which contain "Fried Templars".
Fried Mars Bars are much better..........................
Madra Dubh
"celia" <c_a_...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1138834358.9...@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
> Their first solicitor was Godwine of Binfield.
> Like most of the rest of the Templars his life
> was no doubt worthy and boring.
Let's hear it for boring, Celia.
I like boring.
I've had more than enough "Excitement" for one lifetime.
Madra Dubh
"Vaughan Sanders" <v...@jamie-san.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
news:drshqm$pu5$1$8302...@news.demon.co.uk...
All Ireland rises as one to hoot this down, Jamie.
celia
>beginning with its creation.
If you say something with enough conviction
you will probably get away with it.
In my experience you are more likely to discover
your mistakes yourself than to have them challenged.
Perhaps the spiritual history of the Templars begins
with St. Stephen Harding.
Born of a wealthy English family just before the Conquest
he was educated at Sherbourne before setting out on
a spiritual quest travelling to Scotland, Paris and Rome.
He was said to be a cheerful sort of bloke, though as he
hardly said a word after they had recited the entire Psaltry
each day it must have been difficult to tell.
Eventually he heard of a monastery that was
sufficiently austere to meet his exacting standards;
the monks were so poor that some days they had
not even bread to eat and had to subsist on herbs.
This happy state of affairs was ruined when the
villagers had pity on the monks and supplied their needs.
Escaping this self indulgence St. Stephen, and two others
founded the Cistercians.
The order at first was considered dauntingly severe
and recruits were few but it was from the Cistercians
that the Templars took their white robes and inspiration
for their strict life style.
Stick to the fiction, its more fun.
Celia
William Black
"Madra Dubh" <cca...@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
news:w7pEf.321770$qk4.2...@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
Madra Dubh
"William Black" <willia...@hotmail.co.uk> wrote in message
news:drt9mo$8vq$1...@news.freedom2surf.net...
Come now, Mister Black.
An occasional hoot is good for bringing a glimmer of reality into these
every day situations.
There is, to my knowledge, no doubt among scholars as to the authenticity
and antiquity of ancient Irish manuscripts.
Research would quickly prove the statement "most of it is modern bolllocks"
is either totally incorrect or needs further defining.
<Hoot, Hoot>
Paul J Gans
><am...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>news:1138830980....@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>>
>> William Black wrote:
>> > "Shaun" <Shaun_...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>> > news:1138818743.8...@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>> >
>> > > What I am looking for is an adapted history without bias.
>> >
>> > No such thing.
>>
>> And I thought that "The most modern view...." was completely
>> unbiased.... :-(
>>
>I will quote from EH Carr's seminal work, 'What is History?'
>"The historian is necessarily selective. The belief in a hard core of
>historical facts existing objectively and independently of the
>interpretation of the historian is a preposterous fallacy, but one which is
>very hard to eradicate."
>and
>History is... ...a dialogue between the historian in the present and the
>facts from the past.
>and
>The status of a historical fact will turn on a question of interpretation.
>This element of interpretation of history affects every fact.
Now you've gone and done it. I expect that you will be
howled at as I am. And by quoting a respected source,
you may be responsible for a deterioration in the health
of one of our least-respected regular posters.
----- Paul J. Gans
Paul J Gans
We are not sure what Renia is defending here, but she does it
with admirable tenacity.
This isn't a professional newsgroup. Post away on anything at
all medieval.
----- Paul J. Gans
am...@hotmail.com
Paul, dear, you did not pay attention to what William was reacting upon
(and neither
probably did he unless he recently developed a serious form of a
disease called
"Loss of a sense of humor"): I was referencing to the "Most modern view
on Medieval
History.....". Now, if you dare to say that _I_ was influenced by any
facts of the
past, present or future (except some interesting discoveries by
Vaugham), I'll be
seriously p----d off. :-)
IMHO, "The most modern ..." (and I should know after all) is just a
suitable source for the
authors who are trying to write about history without being willing to
spend a lot of
time on reading huge volumes of a boring material: it is short AND
covers most of the
popular subjects, completely unbiased (I challenge anybody to find any
bias in it).
Free of charge too.....
Now, think carefully before you are going to make any objections!!!!
:-)
Shaun
topic in question, a general overview will provide adequate information
without overwhelming the reader. When it comes to fiction, especially
fantasy fiction, having a history 'well' to draw from is a temptation,
but in this case less is more. As the reader becomes more and more
interested in the story, he or she can envision what that past history
was like. Historical fiction, especially those written by scholars,
tend to get preachy.
Shaun
Madra Dubh
"Paul J Gans" <ga...@panix.com> wrote in message
news:drtg1m$3k3$7...@reader2.panix.com...
And much is posted that isn't.
William Black
It's one of the wonderful things about arguing historical philosophy with
people who don't know anything about historical philosophy.
They get all hot and bothered by words like 'Marxist' and promptly lose all
sense of proportion and the ability to think any rational thoughts.
Just saying 'There are no facts in history' opens you to ridicule for the
thickos who don't understand, quote a respected source and you've got 'em
by the balls until they read the book.
Carr was undoubtedly one of the finest historians of his generation, and
that's the generation that produced Hill and AJP Taylor, and probably the
finest historian of Russia that this country has ever produced.
DHS and his right wing pals aren't going to attack that reputation without
getting thrashed, so they shy away and shoot at the easier targets.
am...@hotmail.com
Shaun wrote:
[]
Sorry Shaun but I was pulling your leg a little bit. "The Most modern
view..." was a
series of jokes I published on SHM while ago. One of the 1st posts with
this title was
(this even has something about the Templars):
"The Most Modern View on Medieval History and Stuff"
Horses.
[Dedicated to Paul by the reasons quite obvious]
1. Introduction
>From a purely physical point of view, the medieval horses were
quite similar to the modern ones: they had approximately the
same number of legs, were predominantly vegetarians and, unless
forced to do otherwise, prefered to relax and have a good time
(which, arguably, makes them intellectually superior to the
humans who just can't stop inventing problems for themselves).
However, comparing to the modern and ancient times, there were
substantial social differences which are often overlooked by
the professional historians (often finances by a secret anti-horse
lobby of the closet Templars [1]).
2. Social Position
Socially, horses belonged to the highest levels of the medieval
society and behaved themselves accordingly aka, did not give
a s--t about anybody else as long as they were properly taken
care of.
Of course, there are no recorded cases of medieval horses
getting officially as high as some of their Roman ancestors
[2] but unofficially they did quite well and, after all, there
was no Medieval violent backlash [3].
An average medieval horse ranked somewhere between burghgraf
and landgraf. Some well-connected and nice looking individuals
managed to get connected to the royal families and highest
aristocracy [4].
As with all other cases of so-called 'feudalism' [5], the horses
did not serve in exchange for land. There also was no recorded
cases of their social seniors exercising so-called 'right of the
1st night' on their horses and the same goes for the horses
vs _their_ subordinates. Cases like one described in [4]
probably were results of a mutual agreement or at least of a
honest misunderstanding (the medieval castles [6] had crampled
living quarters and no electricity; things could easily get
confused).
3. Social Attitudes
Even by the contemporary standards, the medieval horses were
marked by an exception egotism. As recently as in early XIX
it was reported that the 'horses do not have a sense of
patriotism' (of course, this was said about the _French_
horses and one can assume that their British contemporaries
had a different attitude).
Some authors are trying to excuse this attitude by saying that,
with the nations not being invented yet, the horses did not
really had an entity to which they could feel attached (except
their stables). However, it must be noted that even within
quite limited medieval requiremenmts on the subject [7], horses
were marked by an extreme disloyalty: none of them ever hesitated
to switch an owner for a handful of oats.
Not accidentally, they were often excommunicated by the Popes
together with other mercenaries, crossbows and condoms.
4. Civilian and Military Service
In general, being extremely selfish, the medieval horses much
prefered civilian service where they could freely abuse the
socially inferior with a minimal personal risk. According to
at least one theory, the medieval infantry was invented with
an explicit purpose to guard the horses while they were grazing
on the peasants' fields [8].
However, general state of a medieval anarchy did not allow the
horses to follow their natural inclination to stay out of the
harms way. Quite often, and usually against their will, the
horses found themselves involved in various military conflicts.
However, with medieval horse being, on average much more
intelligent than a medieval rider, they managed to improve
their chances for survival by applying numerous legal tricks
and gimmicks.
One of the most popular ones was to complain about a job-related
injury (including a 'psychological trauma') and to get out of
the battlefield for recuperation. Initially, this was rather
difficult to do because most of the fighting had been done in
a tightly regulated environment with only the short range
weapons [9]. However, when the infantry got somewhat out of
hands and started using the hardly controlled weaponry like
the longbows [10], there was always plenty of excuses. English
horses being most socially advanced [11], English warfare
was the 1st to feel an impact: by XIV century the horses
refused to have anything to do with a real fight (after long
negotiations between the Crown and the Union it was agreed that
the horses will carry people to a battlefield but not to the
fight itself). It's a well-known fact that afterwards all
English knights had been fighting on foot and that at Poitiers
they had to contract Frenchmen (under Captal de Bush [12]) to
launch a final cavalry attack. Actually, by this time most of
the French horses already had been unionized and refused to
fight as well.
There is a persistent, even if not documented, rumor about a
secret agreement between the Union and the Guild of the Archers.
This would easily explain events at Agincourt where 'the choosen
few' alledgedly managed to scare the French horses (who were
too well armoured to be _really_ harmed) and to force French
to walk all the way. The medical bills from the French horse
shrinks skyrocketed after this battle with the insurance
premiums raising to a degree which made any French military
action impossible for decades [13].
Even Crusades failed to produce any enthusiasm. Papal promises
of the ever-full basket of oats and free grazing on the Heaven
failed on the deaf ears [14]. Few of them reluctantly agreed
to join the 1st Crusade but even before they reached Asia Minor
most of them deserted. The rest had been continuely bitching
about the long hours, bad food and hot weather and made life
of their owners so miserable that they would do anything to get
to Jerusalem and to have the whole thing finished. We have
only to mention a famous episode with crossing Oronthes when
knight <whatever his name> was forced to swim across the river
in a full armour AND with a horse sitting on his shoulders.
Even if one takes into an account that at this time of the year
the Oronthes almost completely dries out, still carrying a
horse was a difficult task which only the strongest crusaders
could survive.
5. Impact on a Culture
While the medieval horses had a huge impact on the contemporary
art, none of them left anything remarcable in the areas of
literature, painting, architecture or music.
------------
[1] There was a long-brewing labour conflict between the Templars
and Horses Union. Understandably, the horses protested against
high mortality rates, bad food, Templars' refusal to contribute
to a pension fund (with all their money lending/laundering
activities, the Templars were quite reluctant to take money out
of high-yeld business), absense of a health plan for the
retired horses (and a tendency to sell retairees to the suasage
factories) and undearable burden (policy "two knights per
horse" was not officially abolished). As a result, horses went
on strike day before Phillip the Unfair arrested the Templars.
Absense of the means of transportation made escape impossible
and the world's cuisine was augmented by the French Fries.
The survivors (those who manged to hide in a church building
in Scotland) accussed Horses Union in a secret agreement with
Phillip (it was noticed that the diet of the Union's leaders
improved significantly afterwards). Small wonder that the
Hidden Templars had been sworn to hate Papacy, horses and
(until they managed to dispose of it) a French monarchy.
[2] To think about it, was it such a high honour for a horse
to be a Roman Senator if the most of the seats were occupied
by the asses?
[3] A fanatic early-Christian sect led by St. [?] Paul, was
engaged in strangling those horses who refused to give up
their pagan ways. Similar sect ("thugs"?) existed in India
but they restricted their activities to the humans.
[4] This ancestry can be easily traced on the faces of, say,
British Royal Family.
[5] Term invented by the Victorians just for the purpose of
writing the 'historic' novels and poems, and painting the
pictures with the people in a completely unpractical armour
doing something really stupid.
[6] The medieval castled are divided into 2 main categories:
(a) those built/rebuilt/described/depicted by the Victorians and (b)
those which by some reasons escaped Victorian attention.
Group (a) tends to have a lot of the nice-looking turrets,
towers, drawbridges, gargoyles, stairs, painted windows, etc.
Group (b) tends to look like an oversized and not well-planned
public toilet built by a miopic sociopath.
[7] Medieval patriotism more or less boils down to a requirement
to feel some kind of a loyalty to a person who provided you
with a dinner until the said dinner is not completely digested.
This is why medieval food was on a heavy and hard to digest side:
this guaranteed a little longer loyalty.
[8] Which explains why many medieval chronicles did not mention
infantry on a battlefield: they were otherwise occupied.
[9] Even then, as reported in 'Parzival', horses often found an
excuse to get out of the fight and to limit their role to
watching and then carrying survivor(s) back to the
camp.
[10] depending on wind, humidity (or its absense), light,
archer's skill, distractive noices, presense of the females in
a vicimity, distance from the nearest bar and general degree of
drunkedness, an arrow could flew in almost any direction.
[11] Influence of Magna Carta is yet to be proved.
[12] Strangely, this was not used by the Left as a proof of a
general evilness of the Bush family. I wonder why?
[13] A massive insurance fraud was uncovered by Joan of Arc.
French military effort once more became financially feasible
but Joan ended even worse than Jimmy Hoffa.
[14] Preaching to the horses in Latin was not a very good idea
to start with because this language was closely associated with
the sect of the Stranglers.
ken...@cix.compulink.co.uk
<1138848706.0...@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com>,
Shaun_...@yahoo.com (Shaun) wrote:
> What with the understanding that many of the battles the
> Templar and Teutonic Order knights fought in have turned out to
> be absolute massacres
Well first there was a tendency for Islamic commanders to
slaughter members of the military orders if they won. After
Hattin Saladin had all captured Templars and Hospitalers killed
out of hand. However this was an exception, normally the losing
side managed to escape, with any massacres confined to common
soldiery. Somewhere I have a book by Piers Paul Read which is a
history of the Templars relying solely on written sources. It is
fairly dull, but it does make it clear that the only evidence
against the Templars was from countries where torture was used.
The various books like Holy Blood seem to have conflated the
Templars and the Masons with the Rosicrucians and the Illuminati.
The earliest document connecting the Masons with the military
orders dates from the 18th century and links them with the
hospital.
Ken Young
Renia
Are you talking to me?
My grief is against the bald statement "there are no facts in history".
It is a stupid statement to make and anyone who believes it, is a
pretentious socialist.
But, that is not to mean that every "fact" in history, is, truly, a
proper fact, as I have explained countless times.
> Carr was undoubtedly one of the finest historians of his generation, and
> that's the generation that produced Hill and AJP Taylor, and probably the
> finest historian of Russia that this country has ever produced.
For myself, I think Christopher Hill is a wonderful historian (as was
ATJ Taylor), but, Mr Hill is a rampant socialist and that may well have
tempered some of his perspective.
>
> DHS and his right wing pals aren't going to attack that reputation without
> getting thrashed, so they shy away and shoot at the easier targets.
Hmm.
Mr Hines of Hawaii is an idiot, when he's not on his pills. But read
between the lines, and, occasionally, a modicum of sense peers out. Just
because he's an arsehole, doesn't mean to say that EVERYTHING he writes
is worthless.
Vaughan Sanders
Táin Bó Cúailnge, for example ?
> Research would quickly prove the statement "most of it is modern
> bolllocks" is either totally incorrect or needs further defining.
> <Hoot, Hoot>
>
Using 12th and 14th century manuscripts to claim 7c authenticity is a bit
iffy historically, especially when the motive is often modern propaganda.
<snicker>
Jamie
William Black
"Renia" <re...@DELETEotenet.gr> wrote in message
news:dru1vg$fdq$1...@usenet.otenet.gr...
> William Black wrote:
> > It's one of the wonderful things about arguing historical philosophy
with
> > people who don't know anything about historical philosophy.
> >
> > They get all hot and bothered by words like 'Marxist' and promptly lose
all
> > sense of proportion and the ability to think any rational thoughts.
> >
> > Just saying 'There are no facts in history' opens you to ridicule for
the
> > thickos who don't understand, quote a respected source and you've got
'em
> > by the balls until they read the book.
>
>
> Are you talking to me?
If the cap fits...
> My grief is against the bald statement "there are no facts in history".
> It is a stupid statement to make and anyone who believes it, is a
> pretentious socialist.
So read Carr's book and learn.
It's reasonably 'accessible as it's based on a series of lectures and is
still in print in a Penguin edition.
Not only are there no historical facts, if there were any it doesn't matter
anyway.
History is what a historian says it is...
> But, that is not to mean that every "fact" in history, is, truly, a
> proper fact, as I have explained countless times.
>
>
> > Carr was undoubtedly one of the finest historians of his generation,
and
> > that's the generation that produced Hill and AJP Taylor, and probably
the
> > finest historian of Russia that this country has ever produced.
>
> For myself, I think Christopher Hill is a wonderful historian
He's dead.
(as was
> ATJ Taylor), but, Mr Hill is a rampant socialist and that may well have
> tempered some of his perspective.
Hill was an active Communist, a year in Moscow and everything. However he
resigned from the party in 1956.
Like many of the Cambridge Communists he served in intelligence during WWII.
The point about Hill is that his interpretation of history has dominated
historical philosophy for well over half a century. His book 'The Century
of Revolution' caused a revolution in historical thought, to the extent
that it produced hugely popular humorous book called 'No Bed for Bacon',
that's still worth a read as the jokes stand up even today if you're aware
of the arguments.
celia
>levels of medieval society.
An excellent analysis but one that regrettably has the same bias as
many an equine historian in that it almost totally ignores the role
played by the "great ungroomed".
Although by many seen as little better, perhaps even less useful, than
oxen,
without the unsung efforts of the draught horses there would have been
no oats.
Celia
Shaun
come up with this, and why isn't it published somewhere more famous for
others to see? A lot of people would get a kick out of it.
[10] depending on wind, humidity (or its absense), light,
archer's skill, distractive noices, presense of the females in
a vicimity, distance from the nearest bar and general degree of
drunkedness, an arrow could flew in almost any direction.
ROTFLMAO!!! - Not really appropriate for a distinguished individual
such as myself, but I find little choice other than to calmly place my
head bck and fall into a fit of hysteria to the point where my chest
and abdomen cavity throbs.
Shaun Curran
Shaun
would be of use to study this figure? Ken, you mentioned dull books.
Why does it seem historians are more devoted to throwing historical
facts around instead of trying to envision what impact varying
influences would have on these people? John Gardner (better known for
'Grendel') wrote a book on Chaucer that, while whimsical, used
IMAGINATION! That is, he sat down, and wondered what would be going
through the poet's head as he wrote. While he might be inaccurate, his
information gets across much better than someone hammering away on
historical facts.
What about the history of some of the battles attributed to the Knight
in 'The Knight's Tale' (Now we're getting back into medieval thought).
It's quite clear he was a mercenary. Are there any resources that can
be trusted that describe some of these battles in detail? Thus far all
I've read is Terry Jones' book, which may or may not be riddled with
inaccuracies.
Renia
> "Renia" <re...@DELETEotenet.gr> wrote in message
> news:dru1vg$fdq$1...@usenet.otenet.gr...
>
>>William Black wrote:
>
>
>>>It's one of the wonderful things about arguing historical philosophy
>
> with
>
>>>people who don't know anything about historical philosophy.
>>>
>>>They get all hot and bothered by words like 'Marxist' and promptly lose
>
> all
>
>>>sense of proportion and the ability to think any rational thoughts.
>>>
>>>Just saying 'There are no facts in history' opens you to ridicule for
>
> the
>
>>>thickos who don't understand, quote a respected source and you've got
>
> 'em
>
>>>by the balls until they read the book.
>>
>>
>>Are you talking to me?
>
>
> If the cap fits...
>
>
>>My grief is against the bald statement "there are no facts in history".
>>It is a stupid statement to make and anyone who believes it, is a
>>pretentious socialist.
>
>
> So read Carr's book and learn.
All I would learn is yet another left-wing point of view, from what you
say. I like things more balanced.
> It's reasonably 'accessible as it's based on a series of lectures and is
> still in print in a Penguin edition.
Not reasonably accessible here in Greece. And I've too many other things
on my Waterstone's and Ebay "to buy" lists.
>
> Not only are there no historical facts, if there were any it doesn't matter
> anyway.
It doesn't matter? Rather a pointless thing to say, if you believe there
are no historical facts.
> History is what a historian says it is...
>
>
>>But, that is not to mean that every "fact" in history, is, truly, a
>>proper fact, as I have explained countless times.
>>
>>
>>
>>>Carr was undoubtedly one of the finest historians of his generation,
>
> and
>
>>>that's the generation that produced Hill and AJP Taylor, and probably
>
> the
>
>>>finest historian of Russia that this country has ever produced.
>>
>>For myself, I think Christopher Hill is a wonderful historian
>
>
> He's dead.
Thanks for the reminder. It was only a couple of years ago.
>
> (as was
>
>>ATJ Taylor), but, Mr Hill is a rampant socialist and that may well have
>>tempered some of his perspective.
>
>
> Hill was an active Communist, a year in Moscow and everything. However he
> resigned from the party in 1956.
He may have resigned from The Party, but he was still a rampant socialist.
>
> Like many of the Cambridge Communists he served in intelligence during WWII.
>
> The point about Hill is that his interpretation of history has dominated
> historical philosophy for well over half a century. His book 'The Century
> of Revolution' caused a revolution in historical thought, to the extent
> that it produced hugely popular humorous book called 'No Bed for Bacon',
> that's still worth a read as the jokes stand up even today if you're aware
> of the arguments.
Indeed. I had to study this very book as part of my degree.
Shaun
politically does not mean every written report from that individual is
worthless. Yet it is difficult to read or listen to someone with a
reputation of being a radical without being on edge or suspicious. I
think the problem with history is a lack of documentation. Figures that
we 'idolize', whether or not the traditional argument is proven or not,
can be warped to fit our own views. We're seeing that now with such
figures as Napoleon and some of the kings in history.
Renia
Have you always been a "victim"?
Renia
Hmm, methinks you are trying to bitch at me, Paul. Tenacity? This is
only my second comment on Sean's MA, and I only responded because his
comment seemed to warrant one.
>
> This isn't a professional newsgroup. Post away on anything at
> all medieval.
The only professional here, is Mr Gans.
Renia
To whom are you responding? Threads get so long that the subject matter
begins to diverge. You need to quote a bit of context.
William Black
"Renia" <re...@DELETEotenet.gr> wrote in message
> William Black wrote:
> >>My grief is against the bald statement "there are no facts in history".
> >>It is a stupid statement to make and anyone who believes it, is a
> >>pretentious socialist.
> >
> >
> > So read Carr's book and learn.
>
> All I would learn is yet another left-wing point of view, from what you
> say. I like things more balanced.
He wasn't a left winger.
He was an ex Foreign office man who was also deputy editor of The Times for
a period.
In fact a fairly establishment figure for an academic active between the
wars.
> > It's reasonably 'accessible as it's based on a series of lectures and is
> > still in print in a Penguin edition.
>
> Not reasonably accessible here in Greece. And I've too many other things
> on my Waterstone's and Ebay "to buy" lists.
You really should consider this one. It's a basic text for anyone who wants
to understand how history is 'produced'..
> >
> > Not only are there no historical facts, if there were any it doesn't
matter
> > anyway.
>
> It doesn't matter? Rather a pointless thing to say, if you believe there
> are no historical facts.
You misunderstand, possibly deliberatly.
am...@hotmail.com
Shaun wrote:
> Good grief! Your 'Modern View' has left me in tears... lol!
If you are not too lazy, you'll find other chapters by making search in
SHM
for "Most Modern" (title changed a little bit from post to post). Glad
that you liked it.
>How did you
> come up with this,
Strictly by reading SHM posts for a number of years.
>and why isn't it published somewhere more famous for
> others to see?
By a simple reason of not knowing where these 'famous' places are. :-)
>A lot of people would get a kick out of it.
You think so?
>
> [10] depending on wind, humidity (or its absense), light,
> archer's skill, distractive noices, presense of the females in
> a vicimity, distance from the nearest bar and general degree of
> drunkedness, an arrow could flew in almost any direction.
>
> ROTFLMAO!!! - Not really appropriate for a distinguished individual
> such as myself, but I find little choice other than to calmly place my
> head bck and fall into a fit of hysteria to the point where my chest
> and abdomen cavity throbs.
OK, when I have some spare time, I promise to write a new chapter
dedicated to the Templars, Teutons, Masons, etc. and to dedicate it to
you.
Remind me if it takes too long (my boss keeps me really busy with much
less
entertaining things). :-)
am...@hotmail.com
Valuable observation. Probably I should start chapter with explanation
that it is
applicable only to the 'Truly Medieval Horses" and not the beasts of
draught who
belong to the same category as the 'stinky peasants' . They have to
wait for their
own historian because I'm not unbiased to THAT degree.:-)
am...@hotmail.com
William Black wrote:
>
> Carr was undoubtedly one of the finest historians of his generation, and
> that's the generation that produced Hill and AJP Taylor, and probably the
> finest historian of Russia that this country has ever produced.
And who that 'finest historian of Russia' would be? A side question is
how would you
know that <whoever; regardless of who it was> was what you said?
celia
>the same category as the 'stinky peasants'
Alas their were too few of the ilk of
Piers Plowman to give the 'sot ceorles'
a voice but I assure you that the working horse
is of the same breed as the 'Truly Medieval'
However for your entertaining contribution
your prejudice is forgiven and to show there is no
ill feeling I offer a genuine piece of dialogue from
the only surviving copy of the report on the enquiry
into the enclosure of common land at Bray.
It dates from the beginning of the 19th c.
but the voice is the voice of the oppressed
peasant and his ill-bred horse of all generations.
Q Have they always stocked the common?
A Yes
Q With what cattle?
A With horses, cows and sheep.
Q Is a right of turning upon the common
a valuable right to the poor inhabitants of the parish?
A I think so; it is to me I am certain.
Q What are you?
A I deal a little in fruit.
Q Have you occasion to keep a horse for
the purpose of your business?
A I cannot do without one.
Q Is the privilege of turning upon the common
a great benefit to you?
A Very much indeed.
Q What would you do if you were deprived of that benefit?
A I cannot tell, indeed.
Q Should you be able to keep your horse at all?
A No; I could not in the way I am in now.
Q Would it distress you and your family?
A It certainly would.
Q Do you keep more than one horse?
A Yes I do.
Q How many?
A Sometimes I have a breeding mare and a colt.
Q They are little small horses such as are kept on commons?
A Yes; such as are kept on commons.
Q What, are they the little sturdy forest horses?
A In a small way.
Q The little horses with long tails that run about on commons?
AYes; sometimes cock-tail or anyhow.
Need you ask- the commons were enclosed.
Celia
William Black
<am...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1138980114.2...@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
am...@hotmail.com
celia wrote:
> I assure you that the working horse
> is of the same breed as the 'Truly Medieval'
Following this way of a reasoning, you may end up saying that the
stinky peasants belonged to the same breed as the medieval nobles.
While this notion can be supported by certain physical evidience,
most of the contemporaries would be seriously amused/irritated/angered
(depending on their status) if somebody seriously insisted on it.
In other words, you are an illustration to William's thesis about
opinions
being shaped by today's notions. OTOH, my position is entirely within a
framework of a medieval mentality. :-)
> However for your entertaining
>contribution
You mean "enlightening"? I have all reasons to believe that my
'contribution' has
at least as much in common with history as the historical works of
Voltaire. :-)
> your prejudice is forgiven
>and to show there is no
> ill feeling
I don't see why there should be some unless you are paid by "We are
Simple Horses
and Proud of It" lobby...
>I offer a genuine piece of dialogue from
> the only surviving copy of the report on the enquiry
> into the enclosure of common land at Bray.
> It dates from the beginning of the 19th c.
> but the voice is the voice of the oppressed
> peasant
Oppressed peasants tend to be extremely biased against
almost anything.
>and his ill-bred horse of all generations.
Now, ill-bred English horse would be even more obnoxious
than ill-bred English peasant.... :-)
>
> Q Have they always stocked the common?
> A Yes
> Q With what cattle?
> A With horses, cows and sheep.
I can see clear bias against the elephants, camels, donkeys
and other useful domestic animals....
> Q Is a right of turning upon the common
> a valuable right to the poor inhabitants of the parish?
> A I think so; it is to me I am certain.
Getting something for free is always important.
> Q What are you?
> A I deal a little in fruit.
Hmmmmmm, sounds rather like a small-scale enterpreneur
than as a true Poor Peasant who would have a strong negative
attitude to any private initiative and to almost any activity except
bitching about his poverty. Socially, would qualify as "podkulachnik"
and probably end up in Siberia (well, in other time and place) unless
he mends his ways ...
> Q Have you occasion to keep a horse for
> the purpose of your business?
> A I cannot do without one.
Yes, typical "podkulachnik". Probably would like to have at least
one more and then start exploiting other peasants...
> Q Is the privilege of turning upon the common
> a great benefit to you?
> A Very much indeed.
> Q What would you do if you were deprived of that benefit?
> A I cannot tell, indeed.
Pay?
> Q Should you be able to keep your horse at all?
> A No; I could not in the way I am in now.
Answer, which can mean anything. For example, "... unless I cut
drinking..."
> Q Would it distress you and your family?
> A It certainly would.
Sure, being forced to be sober would not improve his temper... IIRC,
Eliza Doolitle
commented on a similar subject"
> Q Do you keep more than one horse?
> A Yes I do.
So I guessed correctly! Siberia all the way....
> Q How many?
> A Sometimes I have a breeding mare and a colt.
Not even a "podkulachnik" but plain "kulak". I wonder if he had more
than one pair of
boots...
> Q They are little small horses such as are kept on commons?
> A Yes; such as are kept on commons.
> Q What, are they the little sturdy forest horses?
> A In a small way.
Are we talking about England? If yes, it is a big surprise to me to
find out that there
were wild horses inhabiting forests of XIX century England...
> Q The little horses with long tails that run about on commons?
Was lenght of a tail somehow relevant to the issue?
> AYes; sometimes cock-tail or anyhow.
>
> Need you ask- the commons were enclosed.
>
I need not: we are paying tolls on the roads which are built on
taxpayers' money and,
supposedly were paid in full years ago.
Thanks for entertainment. :-)
am...@hotmail.com
William Black wrote:
> <am...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:1138980114.2...@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
> >
> > William Black wrote:
> > >
> > > Carr was undoubtedly one of the finest historians of his generation,
> and
> > > that's the generation that produced Hill and AJP Taylor, and probably
> the
> > > finest historian of Russia that this country has ever produced.
> >
> > And who that 'finest historian of Russia' would be? A side question is
> > how would you
> > know that <whoever; regardless of who it was> was what you said?
> >
I see. By 'this country' you meant UK. In this case I'll deffer to your
judgement.
celia
I offer in evidence the fact that they could
interbreed and that the resulting offspring
were fertile.
> We are simple horses and proud of it.
We do a fair days work for a fair days hay.
> the ill-bred English horse would be even more obnoxious
>than the ill-bred English peasant.
You'd better believe it, I own two of them.
> a clear bias against elephants camels...
not got the climate....yet... hear work
is being done on the problem.
> a big surprise to me to find out that there
>were wild horses inhabiting forests in XIX
>century England.
Believe me there are wild horses in the
forests of 21st c. England, (well some of them)
and wild boars and parrots and even wallabies
I kid you not. As far as I know the Norse didn't bring them.
An attempt to improve the stock in the New Forest by
introducing an Arab stallion was a complete failure,
The poor chap didn't stand a chance against the locals.
>Was the length of tail relevant to the issue?
Sir, you are an imposter; you are no gentleman.
Anyone of noble birth would know that the way
to distinguish a gentleman's (or even a wealthy farmer's)
horse from a peasant's horse was by the length of tail.
Note how the respondant, (as you point out a social climber)
implies that he has owned horses that were 'cock tailed'.
In other words had had their tails docked so that they wouldn't
get snagged while out hunting or working on the farm.
Celia
Madra Dubh
Cúailnge's cattle raid.?
Of course.
Do you doubt it's pre conquest origin?
(Unless of course the pre conquest is the Milisian conquest.
>> Research would quickly prove the statement "most of it is modern
>> bolllocks" is either totally incorrect or needs further defining.
>> <Hoot, Hoot>
>>
>
> Using 12th and 14th century manuscripts to claim 7c authenticity is a bit
> iffy historically, especially when the motive is often modern propaganda.
> <snicker>
You are a bit pale on facts here.
Which 12th and 14th century manuscripts do you refer?
And of course you do realize much of Ireland's legends and history were
transmitted orally for many centuries before they were written down.
And they were not being transmitted in Urdu.
But let us cut to the chase.
Are you really supporting the "Celtic languages, most of it is modern
bollocks based on post conquest manuscripts" comment?
Really and truly?
Or are you out to stir the pot a bit, you rascally Scot, you?
<Horse Laugh>
And if you guys want a definitive answer, crosspost this to
soc.culture.irish. There are folks over there who are true experts in this
area.
Vaughan Sanders
"The Táin Bó Cúailnge has survived in two main recensions. The first
consists of a partial text in the Lebor na hUidre (the Book of the Dun Cow),
a late 11th/early 12th century manuscript compiled in the monastery at
Clonmacnoise, and another partial text of the same version in the 14th
century manuscript called the Yellow Book of Lecan."
> And of course you do realize much of Ireland's legends and history were
> transmitted orally for many centuries before they were written down.
> And they were not being transmitted in Urdu.
> But let us cut to the chase.
> Are you really supporting the "Celtic languages, most of it is modern
> bollocks based on post conquest manuscripts" comment?
> Really and truly?
Yep, point me to a Paddy equivalent of "Bede"?
> Or are you out to stir the pot a bit, you rascally Scot, you?
> <Horse Laugh>
> And if you guys want a definitive answer, crosspost this to
> soc.culture.irish. There are folks over there who are true experts in this
> area.
>
No doubt they will claim that the "Táin Bó Cúailnge" is the earliest
vernacular litterateur in the British Isles.
The earliest Ms date from Geoffrey of Monmouth's era, btw
Same where the Taffy's are concerned
<snicker>
Jamie
erilar
<re...@DELETEotenet.gr> wrote:
>
> To whom are you responding? Threads get so long that the subject matter
> begins to diverge. You need to quote a bit of context.
You never read the infamous "Most Modern" series?
--
Mary Loomer Oliver (aka Erilar), biblioholic medievalist
There is no such thing as too many books.
Too few bookshelves can, however, be a problem.
http://www.airstreamcomm.net/~erilarlo
erilar
<re...@DELETEotenet.gr> wrote:
>
> I'm intrigued with the MA in British language. What is this "British"
> language? And a history major with so little knowledge of the workings
> of history?
Some people seem to think history began a couple centuries ago at the
most.
erilar
"Madra Dubh" <cca...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
> > This isn't a professional newsgroup. Post away on anything at
> > all medieval.
>
> And much is posted that isn't.
Make that MOST of what's posted isn't medieval!
e.johansson@telia.com Inger E.Johansson
"Vaughan Sanders" <v...@jamie-san.demon.co.uk> skrev i meddelandet
news:ds0ep4$f3d$1$8302...@news.demon.co.uk...
Jamie,
question. While the earliest Ms in 'full' date from Geoffrey of Monmouth's
era, I am pretty sure that I have seen somewhere that a fragment of a much
older document was found in late 19th or early 20th century.
Correct me if I am wrong but I am pretty sure that I have a note of it
somewhere.
Inger E
>
>
>
Shaun
> language? And a history major with so little knowledge of the workings
> of history?
Some people seem to think history began a couple centuries ago at the
most.
Oh, goodness gracious no! I've primarily studied the history of England
with a focus on the times during which certain manuscripts were
written: Chaucer, Pope, Swift, Shakespeare, etc. This does not, of
course, mean I know nothing about American history or the French
Revolution; it merely implies I narrowed my focus somewhat. I've just
recently begun expanding my 'tastes' to the Middle Easten Conflicts
through the ages, and of course, the Crusades.
S.C.
ken...@cix.compulink.co.uk
<1138973856.5...@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
Shaun_...@yahoo.com (Shaun) wrote:
> Why does it seem historians are more devoted to throwing
> historical facts around instead of trying to envision what
> impact varying influences would have on these people?
Mainly because historians are trying to establish what probably
happened rather than the personalities of the figures. They are
also working from possibly inaccurate and usually biased
documents. For original research on the Crusades you need to be
able to read Greek, Latin, and Arabic adding medieval French and
German would also help.
As for books I am not sure what to recommend, my main interest
is military history not social history. My house is currently
full of piles of books and I am not sure what is where but I
might be able to come up with something, though there are people
on this group with better organised libraries.
Ken Young
Paul J Gans
>"Paul J Gans" <ga...@panix.com> wrote in message
>news:drtg1m$3k3$7...@reader2.panix.com...
>> Renia <re...@deleteotenet.gr> wrote:
>>>Shaun wrote:
>>
>>>>
>>>> Okay, enough! I can tell I am going to either recieve much harsh
>>>> criticism, or those participating in this group will put me out to
>>>> pasture, deeming me too strange to comprehend. One person here has
>>>> questioned my M.A. - if only because I minored in history as an
>>>> undergrad, and my vision of the world at the time is somewhat lacking.
>>>> The program I took, at National University, was a little lacking in
>>>> solid research, focusing instead on generalized genres (the British and
>>>> American Romantics, Postmodernism, etc). I have had to pick up the
>>>> slack.
>>>>
>>>> Yours in history,
>>>>
>>>> Shaun Curran
>>
>>
>>>I wasn't questioning your M.A. itself, but the value of your studies in
>>>history which you now say was lacking in historical research methods.
>>>You admit to a long-held interest in fantasy and science fiction but
>>>these are completely different genres to history or even to historical
>>>fiction. You may find a clash between these genres. Something will
>>>probably have to give.
>>
>> We are not sure what Renia is defending here, but she does it
>> with admirable tenacity.
>>
>> This isn't a professional newsgroup. Post away on anything at
>> all medieval.
>And much is posted that isn't.
Well, we ignore most of that. Or as they say: Consider the
source(s)... ;-)
----- Paul J. Gans
Paul J Gans
Who, me? Absolutely not. As you must long since recognized,
I usually take attacks here on this newsgroup with a grin.
On rare occasions I do know what I'm talking about. And
while I often make a token effort to fight back, I usually
simply let it go.
Life is too short.
---- Paul J. Gans
Paul J Gans
That's quite wrong. There are others. And I've not
gotten a penny in royalties or pay for my talks or
publication on things medieval. So my amateur status
is unbesmirched.
---- Paul J. Gans
Paul J Gans
[snip]
>My grief is against the bald statement "there are no facts in history".
>It is a stupid statement to make and anyone who believes it, is a
>pretentious socialist.
[snip]
>For myself, I think Christopher Hill is a wonderful historian (as was
>ATJ Taylor), but, Mr Hill is a rampant socialist and that may well have
>tempered some of his perspective.
[snip]
Ah Renia, I somehow think that you have a bit of a bias
somewhere...
----- Paul J. Gans
Renia
Blame it on my Dad. And no, he wasn't an arch-Conservatist.
Renia
Conservatist? That's a new one. He wasn't a Conservative.
Paul J Gans
Have you gone to the de re Militari site?
It is a useful site though perhaps not as well designed as it
might be. That's because it is devoted to content, not to art...
The members are frequently historians of some note. The book
reviews alone are valuable. And be sure to check the "Books
and Articles" section. It is rather large.
---- Paul J. Gans
Shaun
> Why does it seem historians are more devoted to throwing
> historical facts around instead of trying to envision what
> impact varying influences would have on these people?
Mainly because historians are trying to establish what probably
happened rather than the personalities of the figures. They are
also working from possibly inaccurate and usually biased
documents. For original research on the Crusades you need to be
able to read Greek, Latin, and Arabic adding medieval French and
German would also help.
I've already begun Greek and Latin! So... when do I get to be called a
'scholar?' <g>
Shaun
Shaun
Have you gone to the de re Militari site?
It is a useful site though perhaps not as well designed as it
might be. That's because it is devoted to content, not to art...
The members are frequently historians of some note. The book
reviews alone are valuable. And be sure to check the "Books
and Articles" section. It is rather large.
Large? I think that is a gross understatement! This place is a great
tool. Thanks! I appreciate it!
Grethe
"celia" <c_a_...@hotmail.com> skrev i en meddelelse
news:1138996146.1...@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
Thanks for the entertainment!
Here's a little horse greeting for you
http://thyrashm.blogspot.com/
Grethe `:)
celia
A Truly Medieval, blue blooded horse.
Yours?
Celia
Madra Dubh
Let's find out, shall we?
Madra Dubh
Or, in the case of soc.history.medieval, "Cite the sources".
ray o'hara
"Madra Dubh" >
> Let's find out, shall we?
>
>
>
you quoted 100+ lines of text 6 messages deep . just to say that?
you are as dumb as GA
Vaughan Sanders
"Inger E.Johansson" <inger e.joh...@telia.com> wrote in message
news:x0QEf.155204$dP1.5...@newsc.telia.net...
>
snip
>>
>> No doubt they will claim that the "Táin Bó Cúailnge" is the earliest
>> vernacular litterateur in the British Isles.
>> The earliest Ms date from Geoffrey of Monmouth's era, btw
>> Same where the Taffy's are concerned
>> <snicker>
>>
>> Jamie
>
> Jamie,
> question. While the earliest Ms in 'full' date from Geoffrey of Monmouth's
> era, I am pretty sure that I have seen somewhere that a fragment of a much
> older document was found in late 19th or early 20th century.
> Correct me if I am wrong but I am pretty sure that I have a note of it
> somewhere.
>
> Inger E
>>
>>
There's fragments of old Irish which some claim show the Tain to be early,
mostly in the margins of early Latin works..
This only becomes a problem when people start using these Ms to prove some
theory or another on the origin of the English language.
The "change of culture" theory did just this when confronted with "why did
English not take any loan words from the P's and Q's?".
Jamie
Shaun
'prove' 7th century sources, well, we can all see the problems with
that. Geoffrey of Monmouth's 'History of the Kings of Britain'
attributes kingship to King Arthur. Unless indeed there was someone
around the 5th and 6th century who united much of England (I don't
know... sources seem either biased or overly dismissal), I don't buy
it, although it seems most of England did.
I'm not up on Tain... can someone show me where I can read this?
Shaun
Alan Crozier
Here's one place to start:
http://www.ucc.ie/celt/publishd.html
Alan
--
Alan Crozier
Lund
Sweden
e.johansson@telia.com Inger E.Johansson
That last one I missed completely. Question that is. But since it must have
been put forward, I would like to know not why the English didn't take any
loan words from the P's and Q's but why do anyone belíeve that notes in
margins could be used to prove any change of culture at all? That I would
like to know.
Inger E
>
>
Vaughan Sanders
Vaughan Sanders
In the later Ms you can find English loan words, if you claim the Ms are
copies of an earlier language (pre A-S), hey presto the language problem is
solved in the "change of culture" scenario (a bit of a blow to this theory
was the latest DNA studies).
How the English took over is one of the big unsolved mysteries of history.
Anglo-Saxon.and Romano-Brit archaeology stand side by side, suggesting they
ignored each other, pretty much what Bede says btw. This of course does not
fit with modern multiculturalism, plus modern Celtic nationalism has also
muddied the waters.
Jamie
Vaughan Sanders
English translation here
http://vassun.vassar.edu/~sttaylor/Cooley/
Jamie
e.johansson@telia.com Inger E.Johansson
Well mystery or not I know for a fact that I can put King Alfred's Orosius
in the hand of people who can't read English but who are well acquainted
with local western Gothaland's dialect as well as old Tanum's dialect. I
done it and they read it without problem telling me what was in the text. Do
I believe that the early language spoken in one or two of the English
Kingdoms origin in Sweden? NO. But since I also had the pleasure back in the
70's to have one of England's more popular bands as guests for a day one
winter up in Sannäs and they took to the ice in order to speak to some of
the Elderly fishermen, men who never learnt English in school, and one of
the guys when they came back after an hour said that there hadn't been any
problem talking with the men as long as the men spoke their dialect(which
was old Tanum's dialect) and the guys themselves spoke their local
'home'-dialect, I always believed it possible that people around the North
Sea might have had same language of different dialects at least from
Migration Age. Can't it be so simple that the A-S who came and the Celts,
and others, who lived in England spoke dialects of same language and had had
contacts for many generations all round the North Sea and thus the
difference that came apart not were so drastic and dramatic when it came to
cultural changes but that the dialect that came to be used and later known
as English were a mix of dialects. You know as we today call 'Stockholm's
dialect' for 'Rikssvenska' and that definitely is a mix of more than one
dialect that later came to be more 'official' Swedish'?
If the groups had had contact for generations over many centuries I would
have been surprised if there was a dramatic change in DNA. Wouldn't you?
Inger E
>
>
erilar
"Madra Dubh" <cca...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
> in the case of soc.history.medieval, "Cite the sources".
Or in the case of the Swedish loon, invent them....
--
Mary Loomer Oliver (aka Erilar), biblioholic medievalist
There is no such thing as too many books.
Too few bookshelves can, however, be a problem.
http://www.airstreamcomm.net/~erilarlo
Rick
Well, it was "background", Ray!
Literate bunch of folks, ain't they?
Wonder how Madra ever stumbled acrost 'em ?
I do wonder about no mention of Guilliame's "Romance of the Rose".
The post did say "range" , though.
Still, I would think it worth mentioning, considering it's influence
on the concept of Romantic Love and Chivalry.
Chaucer in it's original version is worth reviewing, though...
Fascinating use of wording during that period.
Lotta historical Political and Religious stuff in there, too.
Beowulf in the Old English was o.k.
Bit thicker going than Middle English.
Probably why they changed it.
but now I'm gonna have to link over and figure out how this all came
about from out of a Knights Templar thread.... other than thread
drift. :-(
OH!
And "Hoot" ,
"Hoot, mon!"
and it's *nglish...
But maybe that's only if you are in Scotland.
And Madra?
You forgot to cross post to the Welsh Newsgroup...
"Taffy".
Remember?
Getting senile in your retirement, are ye?
Paul J Gans
That's too bad. Many arches are in bad condition and an
Arch Conservationist is what is needed.
---- Paul J. Gans
Paul J Gans
You are welcome. Can you train your newsreader to
quote properly?
---- Paul J. Gans
Paul J Gans
David Spencer Hines.
Well, you asked me...
----- Paul J. Gans
Paul J Gans
>Shaun
If you'd like discussion, please put your response in context.
Quote previous material, including the name(s) of the people
you are quoting.
I have no idea what you mean by "on the topic of utilizing 12th
and 14th century manuscripts to 'prove' 7th century sources,..."
---- Paul J. Gans
Rick
> We are not sure what Renia is defending here, but she does it
> with admirable tenacity.
>
> This isn't a professional newsgroup. Post away on anything at
> all medieval.
>
> ----- Paul J. Gans
So we don't need credentials?
Cool!!
I left mine in my other suit.
Ok. I don't have another suit.
But if I did, that's where my credentials would be.
If anyone were asking for them.
But it's not a medieval suit...
Shaun
Chaucer in it's original version is worth reviewing, though...
Fascinating use of wording during that period.
Lotta historical Political and Religious stuff in there, too.
Amen! My favorite writer!!! His 'Letter to his purse' is whimsical and
funny.There is an article on him in another Google group about a letter
recently found in a British college where Chaucer writes to the scribe
'Pinkerton' about his errors on Troilus and Crysede. Basically, Chaucer
threatens Pinkerton with a curse of plague unless he improves his
attention to accuracy.
Chaucer the Satirist at his finest!
Shaun
Shaun
You are welcome. Can you train your newsreader to
quote properly?
I'd be glad to, if only I knew how... Help!
Shaun Curran
am...@hotmail.com
celia wrote:
> > stinky peasants belonged to the same breed
> .>as medieval nobles
>
> I offer in evidence the fact that they could
> interbreed and that the resulting offspring
> were fertile.
Breed was defined not by considerations of genetics
(which was not invented yet) but by social considerations.
However, even now you argument does not hold water:
chihuaua and yorkshire terrier are different breeds but
their join offspring would be fertile. And, what is more
important, cute. :-)
>
> > We are simple horses and proud of it.
>
> We do a fair days work for a fair days hay.
A honest answer is: who cares.
>
> > the ill-bred English horse would be even more obnoxious
> >than the ill-bred English peasant.
>
> You'd better believe it, I own two of them.
>
Two ill-bred English peasants? My condolescenses...
> > a clear bias against elephants camels...
>
> not got the climate....
Excuses, excuses....
>yet... hear work
> is being done on the problem.
Not in XIX century. You are anachronistic again....
>
> > a big surprise to me to find out that there
> >were wild horses inhabiting forests in XIX
> >century England.
>
> Believe me there are wild horses in the
> forests of 21st c. England,
I can believe in many things regarding XXI century England
after visiting it twice but I have reasons to believe that England
of XIX century was considerably less bizzare place.
> >Was the length of tail relevant to the issue?
>
> Sir, you are an imposter; you are no gentleman.
Never pretended to be one so how could I be an impostor?
> Anyone of noble birth
Did I say a word about being of a noble birth? I don't think so. BTW,
this guarantees my evenhandedness on this issue.
Paul J Gans
But folks will argue with you and cite books as
backup to their ideas...
---- Paul J. Gans
Paul J Gans
>Shaun Curran
What newsreader do you use?
---- Paul J. Gans
Rick
Thank you for that information.
I'll try to look it up soon.
Grethe
"celia" <c_a_...@hotmail.com> skrev i en meddelelse
news:1139048612.4...@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
No, I'm just on a friendly "Hello, how are you little horse"?
when I pass by.
Grethe