David McCullough, Oxfordian?
Spam Scone
sorry Ogburn books. However, the Shakespeare Fellowship hasn't drafted
him as one of their own, and based on the evidence of all the false
claims the SF has made about Melville, Dickens, Emerson, and others, it
appears they will draft anybody into antiStratdom on the slightest
pretext. So, what's the verdict?
LynnE
"Spam Scone" <Spam...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1108086222....@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
"The strange, difficult, contradictory man who emerges as the real
Shakespeare, Edward
de Vere, the 17th Earl of Oxford, is not just plausible but fascinating and
wholly believable."
David McCullough, Pulitzer Prize-winning historian,
author of Truman and John Adams.
From
http://www.sourcetext.com/sourcebook/
Thank you for giving me an excuse to write this.
LynnE
>
Spam Scone
Why isn't he in your 'murderer's row' at the SF then? As for
McCullough's delusional belief in Ogburn, 'the less McCullough he.'
Art Neuendorffer
>>> I understand McCullough wrote the preface to one of the sorry
>>> Ogburn books. However, the Shakespeare Fellowship hasn't drafted
>>> him as one of their own, and based on the evidence of all the false
>>> claims the SF has made about Melville, Dickens, Emerson, and
>>> others, it appears they will draft anybody into antiStratdom
>>> on the slightest pretext. So, what's the verdict?
> > "The strange, difficult, contradictory man who
> > emerges as the real Shakespeare, Edward
> > de Vere, the 17th Earl of Oxford, is not just plausible
> > but fascinating and wholly believable."
> > David McCullough, Pulitzer Prize-winning historian,
> > author of Truman and John Adams.
> >
> > From
> > http://www.sourcetext.com/sourcebook/
> Why isn't he in your 'murderer's row' at the SF then? As for
> McCullough's delusional belief in Ogburn, 'the less McCullough he.'
The TOUGH McCullough coughs as he PLOUGHs the dough.
http://starbellie.com/collection/books/toughcoughs.html
--------------------------------------------------------------------
CERTAIN ANCIENT GREEK EPIGRAMS TRANSLATED.
Grave Night the light weed of the Day shall wear,
Fresh streams shall chase the sea, TOUGH PLOUGHs shall tear
Her fishy bottoms, men in long date dead
Shall rise and live, before Oblivion shed
Those still-green leaves that crown great HOMER'S head.
The Odysseys of HOMER, vol. 1. 1857.
Is ARETE, of parents born the same
http://sunsite.berkeley.edu/OMACL/Hesiod/homrhes.html
and their horses' necks --'
when they had had enough of war.'
HOMER to be crowned. But King Paneides bade each
the harvest, and begin PLOUGHing ere they set.
round, when first the sickle is sharpened. This is the
law of the plains and for those who dwell near the sea or
live in the rich-soiled valleys, far from the wave-tossed deep:
strip to sow, and strip to PLOUGH, and strip to reap
when all things are in season.'
Ares would have scorned them had he met them, nor yet ATHENA
and each man with his fellow, and the peaks of their head-pieces
with crests of horse-hair touched as they bent their heads: so
close they stood together. The murderous battle bristled with
the long, flesh-rending SPEARS they held, and the flash of BRONZE
from polished helms and new-burnished breast-plates and gleaming
shields blinded the eyes. Very hard of heart would he have been,
who could then have seen that strife with joy and felt no pang.'
Peter Farey wrote:
Michael Wood's book from the June 8th Sunday Telegraph:
of Warwickshire dialect words and farming terms:
"EAR" as a verb meaning to PLOUGH, "hade land" for the turn
disguise rather than the country boy from the Midlands.>>
(Book 3 Elegy 9), however, we find
The PLOUGHman's hopes were frustrate at the last.
The grain-rich goddess in high woods did stray,
Her long hair's ear-wrought garland fell away.
FW 18:30 an EARSHARE the pourquose of which was to cassay
the earthcrust at all of hours, furrowards, bagawards,
like YOXEN at the turnpaht.
PLOW, PLOUGH, n. [OE. plouh, plou, AS. pl[=o]h; akin to D. ploeg, G.
pflug, OHG. pfluog, pfluoh, Icel. pl[=o]gr, Sw. plog, Dan. ploug, plov,
Russ. plug', Lith. plugas.] 1. A well-known implement, drawn by horses,
mules, OXEN, or other power, for turning up the soil to prepare it
for bearing crops; also used to furrow or break up the soil for
other purposes; as, the subsoil PLOW; the draining PLOW.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PLOW, PLOUGH, v. t. 1. To turn up, break up, or trench, with a PLOW; to
till with, or as with, a PLOW; as, to PLOW the ground; to PLOW a field.
to run through, as in sailing.
as a book or paper, with a PLOW.
especially, a rectangular groove to receive the end of
a shelf or tread, the edge of a panel, a tongue, etc.
----------------------------------------------------------------
Italian, Latin: ARARE: (PLOUGH, PLOUGH up, PLOW up, till).
----------------------------------------------------------------
Proverbs Chapter 20, Verse 4
noluit mendicabit ergo aestate et non dabitur ei
thanne he shal begge in somer, and it shal not ben yiue to hym.
therefore shall he beg in harvest, and have nothing.
----------------------------------------------------------------
From THE DEVIL'S DICTIONARY
----------------------------------------------------------------
Deut. 22:10 Thou shalt not PLOW with an OX and an ASS together.
----------------------------------------------------------------
ASS frequently mentioned throughout Scripture. Of the domesticated
species we read of, (1.) The she ASS (Heb. 'athon), so named from its
slowness (Gen. 12:16; 45:23; Num. 22:23; 1 Sam. 9:3). (2.) The male ASS
(Heb. hamor), the common working ASS of Western Asia, so called from
its red colour. Issachar is compared to a strong ASS (Gen. 49:14).
(3.) The ASS's colt (Heb. 'AIR), mentioned Judg. 10:4; 12:14.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
ANCIENT ROMAN RELIGION BY FRANK PONTIFEX
http://members.aol.com/hlabadjr/Gelli.htm
St Augustine of Hippo (354-430) mentions an episode reported
by the Roman historian & polymath Varro (116-27 BC)
relates the following:
PLOUGHman was driving his PLOUGH near the tomb of Numa
Pompilius - the second king of Rome - when he turned up the
books of that author which dealt with the reasons for the
established ceremonies of the Roman religion. He immediately
took them to the city and handed them to the magistrate
(praetor). The magistrate took a look at the opening passages
and then reported the find to the Senate, as a matter of
great importance. When the leading senators had read some
of the reasons given by King Numa for various religious
practices, the senate approved the action of the deceased
king, and as pious men, decreed that the magistrate should
burn those books."
T O T H E o n L i[E] B E G E T T
E{r}o F T{H} e [S|E] I N S U I N G
S{o}n n{E} T S (M)r W H a l l H A
P{p}i{N}e S [S|E|A) n D T H A T E
T{e|R}n I T I [E]p(R)o M I S E D
B{Y|O] U R E V E R l(I) V I N G P
O[E] T W I S H E T H T (H) E W E L
[L|W] I S H I N G A D V E N T U R
e[R] I N S E T T I N G F O R T H
O T H E O {N}L i[E| B E G E T T E R O
F T H E S E{I}n[S| U I N G S O N N E
T S M R W h a {L|L|H] A P P I{N}E S S
E A N D t h a t {E|T]{e}R N I T{I}E P
R O M I S E D [B|Y|O] U{r}E V E R{L}I
V I N G P O [E]t W|I] S H{e}T H T H{E}
|W]E L L W I S h I N G A{d V e}N T U
|R]E R I N S E t T I N G F O R T H T
----------------------------------------------
PUCK: Now the hungry LION roars,
And the wolf behowls the moon;
Whilst the heavy PLOUGHMAN snores,
All with weary task fordone.
SPHINX: rising of the NILE while the sun is in LEO
O T H E O {N}L i[E| B E G E T T E R O
F T H E S E {I}n[S| U I N G S O N N E
T S M R W h a {L|L|H] A P P I{N}E S S
E A N D t h a t {E|T]{e}R N I T{I}E P
R O M I S E D [B|Y|O] U{e}E V E R{L}I
V I N G P O [E]t W|I] S H{e}T H T H{E}
|W]E L L W I S h I N G A{d V e}N T U
|R]E R I N S E t T I N G F O R T H T
------------------------------------------
Melts from the mountains hoar, and Zephyr's breath
Unbinds the crumbling clod, even then 'tis time;
Press deep your PLOUGH behind the GROANING OX,
And teach the furrow-burnished SHARE to shine.
liquitur et Zephyro putris se glaeba resolvit,
depresso+ incipiat iam tum mihi TAURUS ARATRO+
ingemere et sulco+ attritus+ splendescere+ VOMER.
Editions and translations: English (ed. J. B. Greenough)
405 Vulgate: Concidite ARATRA vestra in gladios et ligones vestros
in lanceas infirmus dicat quia fortis ego sum
or mattokis, in to SPERIS; the seeke man saye, for Y am strong.
into SPEARS: let the weak say, I am strong.
CHAPTER XI Of What Befell Don Quixote with Certain Goatherds
had not dared to rend and pierce the tender bowels of our first mother
that without compulsion yielded from every portion of her broad fertile
bosom all that could satisfy, sustain, and delight the children that
then possessed her. Then was it that the innocent and fair young
shepherdess roamed from vale to vale and hill to hill, with flowing
locks, and no more garments than were needful modestly
He gorged on farming terms and would refer to MEERS,
or banks and hedges (as in Enobarbus's "the MEERED question").
or to leas, or tilled lands (as in Timon's command to mother
earth, "dry up thy marrows, vines, and PLOUGH-torn leas").>>
- p. 35 _Shakespeare a Life_ by Honan
----------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.bulfinch.org/fables/bull34.html
Bulfinch's Mythology
agriculture and taught men the use of them, as well as how to harness
the OX to the PLOUGH. He then gave men laws, the institution of
marriage, a civil organization, and taught them how to worship the gods.
After he had thus made the valley of the NILE a happy country, he
assembled a host with which he went to bestow his blessings upon the
rest of the world. He conquered the nations everywhere, but not with
weapons, only with music and eloquence. His brother, *SET* (Typhon) saw
this, and filled with envy and malice sought during his absence to usurp
his throne. But ISIS, who held the reins of government, frustrated his
plans. Still more embittered, he now resolved to kill his brother.
This he did in the following manner: Having organized a conspiracy
of *72* members, he went with them to the feast which was celebrated
in honour of the king's return. He then caused a box or chest to be
brought in, which had been made to fit exactly the size of Osiris,
and declared that he would give that chest of precious wood to
whomsoever could get into it. The rest tried in vain, but no sooner
was Osiris in it than *SET* and his companions closed the lid
and flung the chest into the NILE.
-------------------------------------------------------
SPHINX: rising of the NILE while the sun is in LEO
--------------------------------------------------------
O T H E O {N}L i[E| B E G E T T E R O
F T H E S E {I}n[S| U I N G S O N N E
T S M R W h a {L|L|H] A P P I{N}E S S
E A N D t h a t {E|T]{e}R N I T{I}E P
R O M I S E D [B|Y|O] U{e}E V E R{L}I
V I N G P O [E]t W|I] S H{e}T H T H{E}
|W]E L L W I S h I N G A{d V e}N T U
|R]E R I N S E t T I N G F O R T H T
-----------------------------------------
When ISIS heard of the cruel murder she wept and mourned, & then
materially assisted by Anubis, the son of Osiris and Nephthys. They
sought in vain for some time; for when the chest, carried by the waves
to the shores of Byblos, had become entangled in the reeds that grew
*at the edge of the water* , the divine power that dwelt in the
body of Osiris imparted such strength to the shrub that it grew
into a mighty tree, enclosing in its trunk the coffin of the god.>>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
UNO VERE-VIR(G)IL G = 33th letter (Masonic)
NIL VERO-VERIU(S) S = 19th letter
OUR EVER-LIVIN(G) G = 33th letter (Masonic)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.gardenvisit.com/t/c1s2.html
'to do with agriculture' it was not the poet's sole purpose
to write an agricultural treatise in verse. His aims were also
political & philosophical. Like Horace, his contemporary in first
century BC Rome, VIRGIL delighted in the life style of rural retirement.
The two poets contrast the virtues of pastoral life with the civil war,
waste & political turmoil which plagued Rome after the assassination
of Caesar in 44 BC. They dreamt of a new GOLDEN AGE
Him that hath not, nor envied him that hath.
What fruits the branches, what the willing earth
Freely afford, he gathers, nor beholds
State archives, ruthless laws and city broils.
Others may vex the treacherous firth with oars
And rush upon the sword; through palaces
And courts of kings their headlong course they hold...
Has cleft the earth: hence labour's yearly meed,
Hence feeds he little child and father land.
Hence are milch-cow and honest OX maintained.
Earth never rests: either with fruit she flows,
Or with young lambs, or with the wheaten sheaf
Beloved of Ceres: increase the drills
And barns are OVERcome.
& Theocritus, upon whom VIRGIL & Horace modelled their poetry.
Horace studied at the academy in Athens as a young man and may
have been taught philosophy in the garden, as had been the custom of
Plato & Epicurus. Horace particularly admired Epicurus' doctrine that
happiness results from the enjoyments of the mind and the sweets of
virtue. He was offered the job of private secretary to Augustus but
turned it down because he liked best the life of rural retirement
on his farm in the Sabine Hills: "Happy the man who bounteous
Gods allow, With his own hands Paternal Grounds to PLOUGH.">>
----------------------------------------------------------------
<< VIRGIL once made a distich praising Augustus
and wishing him good luck, but did not inscribe the leaves
with the author's name. The `distich went like this:
Caesar SHARES the power of Jupiter.
written these verses, but could not discover their author. A mediocre
poet by the name of BATILLuS actually ascribed them to himself,
and no one said a word. In consequence, he received honor & gifts
from Caesar. Augustus then requested that the verses be completed.
VIRGIL added the following under the distich:
Thus do ye, not for yourselves, make nests, ye birds.
Thus do ye, not for yourselves, render your fleece, ye sheep.
Thus do ye, not for yourselves, make HONEY, ye bees.
Thus do ye, not for yourselves, endure the PLOW, ye OXEN.>>
------------------------------------------------------------------
BATILL(u)S
BALLIST(a)
-------------------------------------------------------------------
<<VIRGIL's first attempt at poetry is the following couplet
who was stoned to death for [highway robbery]:
Wayfarer, now night and day follow your course without fear."
john baker wrote:
> "Hollinshed] tells the story of a PLOUGHMAN
> and his two sons who turn the tide of a battle...
-----------------------------------------------------------
Great Men (Social status of).
CLARE, a PLOUGHMAN, son of a farm labourer.
------------------------------------------------------------
Echoes -- Lewis Carroll (1869)
EVERy ringlet, lightly SHAKEn, ran itself in GOLDEN THREAD.
Of me she shall not win renown:
For the baseness of its nature shall have strength to drag her down.
There stands the inspector at thy door:
Like a dog, he hunts for boys who know not two and two are four."
She said, and wondering looked at me:
"It is the dead unhappy night, and I must hurry home to tea."
-----------------------------------------------------------
Lady CLARA VERE de VERE (1842) - Alfred Lord Tennyson
From yon blue heavens above us bent
The gardener Adam and his wife
Smile at the claims of long descent.
Howe'er it be, it seems to me,
'Tis only noble to be good.
KIND HEARTS are more than coronets,
And simple faith than Norman blood.
_DiscoVERiEs_ by Ben Jonson (1640)
De Shakespeare *NOSTRAT*
---------------------------------------------------------------
<<I remember, the players have often mentioned it as an honour
to Shakespeare, that in his writing (whatsoever he penned)
he NEVER BLOTTED OUT line.
My answer hath been, would he had BLOTTED a thousand.>>
------------------------------------------------------------------
COLOSSIANS 2:13 And you, being dead in your sins and
and took it out of the way, NAILING it to his cross;
{HEBE}, Cup-bearer of the Gods
http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/Herakles/hebe.html
--------------------------------------------------------------------
_DiscoVERiEs_ by Ben Jonson (1640)
De Shakespeare *NOSTRAT*
<<Hee [Shakespeare] was (indeed) honest, and of an open, and free
wherein hee FLOW'D with that facility, that sometime it was necessary
His wit was in his owne power ; would the rule of it had beene so too.
Many times he fell into those things [that] could not
escape laughter, as when he said in the person of CAESAR,
one speaking to him, "CAESAR thou dost me WRong".
[CAESAR NEVER DID WR]ong
[EDWARD VERE CAIRN S]ong
------------------------------------------------------------------
with his vertues. There was EVER more in him to be praysed,
then to be PARDONed.>>
-----------------------------------------------------------------
<< {HEBE} was worshipped as a goddess of PARDONs
--------------------------------------------------------------------
_DiscoVERiEs_ by Ben Jonson (1640)
De Shakespeare *NOSTRAT*
<<In the difference of wits, I have obs-ERV'D ; there are many notes:
And it is a little Maistry to know them : to discerne,
formes of minds, then of bodies amongst us. The variety is incredible;
some Poets, some Lawyers, some Physicians ;
*some to be sent to the PLOUGH, and trades* . >>
Golding's Ovid.
And looketh backward still upon his sonnes. The fishermen
Then standing angling by the Sea, and shepeherdes leaning then
On sheepehookes, and the PLOUGHMEN on the handles of their PLOUGH,
Beholding them, amazed were: and thought that they that through
The Aire could flie were Gods
----------------------------------------------------------
M. Tullius CICERO, Philippicae Orationes in M. Antonium:
IN M. ANTONIVM ORATIO PHILIPPICA SECVNDA
Editions and translations: (ed. Albert Clark)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------
F T H E S E {I}n[S| U I N G S O N N E
T S M R W h a {L|L|H] A P P I{N}E S S
E A N D t h a t {E|T]{e}R N I T{I}E P
R O M I S E D [B|Y|O] U{e}E V E R{L}I
V I N G P O [E]t W|I] S H{e}T H T H{E}
|W]E L L W I S h I N G A{d V e}N T U
|R]E R I N S E t T I N G F O R T H T
-----------------------------------------
A hurtfull Art Neuendorffer
LynnE
is mentioned on the site somewhere.
L.
Spam Scone
I found a "cheerleading" thread by Mark "Pom-pom" Alexander in 2001
trumpeting the McCullough forward as "bad news for Strats". Perhaps
David Webb's common-sense response caused the SF to downplay the
McCullough endorsement:
In article <Gc0b7.232$eU4.39...@newsread2.prod.itd.earthlink.net>, Mark
Alexander <mark_a...@earthlink.net> wrote:
> More bad news for Strats:
> Isn't it nice that a noted historian and fellow Oxfordian has had a
#1
> bestseller for many weeks now, with his biography of John Adams?
I certainly wouldn't call that "bad news" for anyone; it's good news
for McCullough and his well-wishers, and he is to be congratulated.
His expertise in his area is irrelevant to his lack of professional
expertise in other areas, and it is unlikely that any but the credulous
would look to a specialist in American history for authoritative
information concerning Elizabethan literary history.
> David McCullough: "The strange, difficult, contradictory man who
emerges as
> the
> real Shakespeare, Edward de Vere, the 17th Earl of Oxford, is not
just
> plausible
> but fascinating and wholly believable. It is hard to imagine anyone
who reads
> the book with an open mind ever seeing Shakespeare or his works in
the same
> way
> again" (From the Foreword to the second edition of The Mysterious
William
> Shakespeare by Charlton Ogburn)
> His Oxfordian position seems not to have damaged his credibility.
Nor did Martin Bernal's _Black Athena_, a book savaged by Classics
scholars, damage its author's credibility in his area of expertise,
Chinese history and politics. In this case a distinguished historian
ventured into the history of an era and a culture in which he lacked
professional expertise and drew surprising conclusions that did not
withstand scrutiny. Even William Shockley's notorious, racist forays
into genetics did not damage his credibility as a Nobel Laureate in
Physics, and indeed it is unlikely that any but the credulous would
look to a specialist in solid state physics for authoritative opinions
on genetics.
in short, McCullough's well-deserved success, while a cause for
jubilant celebration among those who admire his work in his area of
professional expertise, is irrelevant to the question of who wrote the
works of Shakespeare; I doubt that any reasonable person would view
McCullough's success as "bad news," whatever his or her opinion
concerning Shakespeare authorship might be.
David Webb
Art Neuendorffer
> No idea. Am not in charge of the usual suspects line-up.
> I believe he is mentioned on the site somewhere.
If their doings could be found out and made public with the rest,
of which number is first:
----------------------------------------------------------------
The Bookshelf Top Picks
http://www.shakespearefellowship.org/bookshelf.html
-----------------------------------------------------------------
The Mysterious William Shakespeare:
The Man and the Myth. by Charlton Ogburn.
EPM Press, 1992 (2nd edition). 892 pages.
This 1984 book re-ignited the case for Oxford's authorship of the
Shakespeare canon. "The sholarship is surpassing -- brave,original, full of
surprise,--and in the hands of so gifted a writer it fairly lights up the
sky," wrote noted historian David McCullough. Still the most comprehensive
and persuasive book advocating de Vere's authorship of the Shakespeare
Canon.
-----------------------------------------------------------
Art N.
Spam Scone
In the 20 years since that book was published, has David McCullough
made any public statement supporting the Oxfordian "cause", aside from
the forward to that book?
Art Neuendorffer
> trumpeting the McCullough forward as "bad news for Strats". Perhaps
> David Webb's common-sense response caused the SF to downplay the
> McCullough endorsement:
> Mark Alexander <mark_a...@earthlink.net> wrote:
> > More bad news for Strats:
>
>> bestseller for many weeks now, with his biography of John Adams?
> I certainly wouldn't call that "bad news" for anyone; it's good news
> for McCullough and his well-wishers, and he is to be congratulated.
> His expertise in his area is irrelevant to his lack of professional
> expertise in other areas, and it is unlikely that any but the credulous
> would look to a specialist in American history for authoritative
> information concerning Elizabethan literary history.
> I'm sure [Webb] is as thrilled as I am at such ENCOMIA (sic).
> > David McCullough: "The strange, difficult, contradictory man
> > who emerges as the real Shakespeare, Edward de Vere,
> > but fascinating and wholly believable.
> > It is hard to imagine anyone who reads
> > the book with an open mind ever seeing Shakespeare
> > or his works in the same way again"
> > (From the Foreword to the second edition of
> > The Mysterious William Shakespeare by Charlton Ogburn)
> McCullough's well-deserved success, while a cause for
> jubilant celebration among those who admire his work in his area of
> professional expertise, is irrelevant to the question of who wrote the
> works of Shakespeare; I doubt that any reasonable person would view
> McCullough's success as "bad news," whatever his or her opinion
> concerning Shakespeare authorship might be.
Art Neuendorffer
> In the 20 years since that book was published, has David McCullough
> made any public statement supporting the Oxfordian "cause", aside from
> the forward to that book?
Does he need to?
Art N.
Spam Scone
Nothing like ducking an awkward question with another question.....
Art Neuendorffer
> >
> > > In the 20 years since that book was published, has David McCullough
> > > made any public statement supporting the Oxfordian "cause", aside
> > > from the forward to that book?
> Art Neuendorffer wrote:
> > Does he need to?
"Spam Scone" <Spam...@yahoo.com> wrote
> Nothing like ducking an awkward question with another question.....
Nothing like ducking an awkward question with a rhetorical remark.
Art N.
LynnE
"Art Neuendorffer" <aneuendor...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:CqOdnU_WwM1...@comcast.com...
The more important question is, "Has he rescinded what he once said?" I
can't find anything to indicate that he has.
Lynne
>
>
Spam Scone
I think his silence shows just how important McCullough thinks
Oxfordians are.
David L. Webb
"Art Neuendorffer" <aneuendor...@comcast.net>
(aneuendor...@comicass.nut) wrote:
> "Spam Scone" <Spam...@yahoo.com> wrote
>
> > I found a "cheerleading" thread by Mark "Pom-pom" Alexander in 2001
> > trumpeting the McCullough forward as "bad news for Strats". Perhaps
> > David Webb's common-sense response caused the SF to downplay the
> > McCullough endorsement:
> > --------------------------------------------------------------------
> > Mark Alexander <mark a...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
> > > More bad news for Strats:
> >
> >> Isn't it nice that a noted historian & fellow Oxfordian has had a #1
> >> bestseller for many weeks now, with his biography of John Adams?
>
> David Webb:
>
> > I certainly wouldn't call that "bad news" for anyone; it's good news
> > for McCullough and his well-wishers, and he is to be congratulated.
> > His expertise in his area is irrelevant to his lack of professional
> > expertise in other areas, and it is unlikely that any but the credulous
> > would look to a specialist in American history for authoritative
> > information concerning Elizabethan literary history.
>
> Better that we rely instead upon a "linguist" from Chicago:
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> "David Kathman" <dj...@ix.netcom.com> wrote
>
> > I'm sure [Webb] is as thrilled as I am at such ENCOMIA (sic).
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
I've already corrected this error of yours on the other thread, Art.
That your native tongue is not English is of course excusable; that you
cannot use the OED is less so.
> > > David McCullough: "The strange, difficult, contradictory man
> > > who emerges as the real Shakespeare, Edward de Vere,
> > > the 17th Earl of Oxford, is not just plausible
> > > but fascinating and wholly believable.
> > > It is hard to imagine anyone who reads
> > > the book with an open mind ever seeing Shakespeare
> > > or his works in the same way again"
> > > (From the Foreword to the second edition of
> > > The Mysterious William Shakespeare by Charlton Ogburn)
>
> > Mark Alexander <mark a...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
> > > [McCullough's] Oxfordian position
> > > seems not to have damaged his credibility.
>
> David Webb:
>
> > McCullough's well-deserved success, while a cause for
> > jubilant celebration among those who admire his work in his area of
> > professional expertise, is irrelevant to the question of who wrote the
> > works of Shakespeare; I doubt that any reasonable person would view
> > McCullough's success as "bad news," whatever his or her opinion
> > concerning Shakespeare authorship might be.
> And what EXACTLY is DNB contributor
> David Kathman's area of professional expertise??
As you would know if you were paying attention, Art, Dave's Ph.D. is
in linguistics. HoweVER, for quite some time his work has been in the
history of the Elizabethan theatre, and he has been quite successful --
his work appears in major peer-reviewed publications, and as you noted
above, he has even contributed to the DNB. His credentials as literary
historian of the period in question are irreproachable.
By the way, Art, what EXACTLY is the area of professional expertise
of aneuendor...@comicass.nut? Stand-up comedy? Or perhaps
fall-down comedy?
Art Neuendorffer
> > >
> > > > In the 20 years since that book was published,
> > > > has David McCullough made any public statement
> > > > supporting the Oxfordian "cause",
> > > > aside from the forward to that book?
> > "Art Neuendorffer" <aneuendor...@comcast.net> wrote
> > > Does he need to?
> LynnE wrote:
> > The more important question is,
> > "Has he rescinded what he once said?"
> > I can't find anything to indicate that he has.
"Spam Scone" <Spam...@yahoo.com> wrote
> I think his silence shows just how important
> McCullough thinks Oxfordians are.
If anything, his silence shows just how intimidating
McCullough has found Stratfordians to be.
If he was a spineless as most people in positions of authority
he would have renounced his Oxfordian stance by now.
Art Neuendorffer
Art Neuendorffer
> >
> > > I found a "cheerleading" thread by Mark "Pom-pom" Alexander in 2001
> > > trumpeting the McCullough forward as "bad news for Strats". Perhaps
> > > David Webb's common-sense response caused the SF to downplay the
> > > McCullough endorsement:
> > > --------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > Mark Alexander <mark a...@earthlink.net> wrote:
> >
> > > > More bad news for Strats:
> > >
> > >> Isn't it nice that a noted historian & fellow Oxfordian has had a #1
> > >> bestseller for many weeks now, with his biography of John Adams?
> >
> > David Webb:
> >
> > > I certainly wouldn't call that "bad news" for anyone; it's good news
> > > for McCullough and his well-wishers, and he is to be congratulated.
> > > His expertise in his area is irrelevant to his lack of professional
> > > expertise in other areas, and it is unlikely that any but the credulous
> > > would look to a specialist in American history for authoritative
> > > information concerning Elizabethan literary history.
> > Better that we rely instead upon a "linguist" from Chicago:
> > --------------------------------------------------------------------
> > "David Kathman" <dj...@ix.netcom.com> wrote
> >
> > > I'm sure [Webb] is as thrilled as I am at such ENCOMIA (sic).
> > --------------------------------------------------------------------
> I've already corrected this error of yours on the other thread, Art.
ENCOMIUM, n.; pl. {ENCOMIUMS}.
His ENCOMIUMS awakened all my ardor. --W. Irving.
EVERy other enjoyment malice may destroy; EVERy other
I have got enough of the old masters! Brown says he has "shook" them,
accept at his own house, and sentence of water-gruel was passed upon him.
Among the good company which had attended in the hall during the
bone-setting, Mrs. Honour was one; who being summoned to her mistress as
soon as it was over, and asked by her how the young gentleman did, presently
launched into extravagant praises on the magnanimity, as she called it, of
his behaviour, which, she said, "was so charming in so pretty a creature."
She then burst forth into much warmer ENCOMIUMS on the beauty of his
though he could not refrain from paying some compliments to the gold lace
The master was so highly elated with these ENCOMIUMS, that he could not
refrain from adding some more of his own. He said, "The present age was not
improved in anything so much as in their puppet-shows; which, by throwing
out PUNCH and his wife Joan, and such idle trumpery, were at last brought to
be a rational entertainment. I remember," said he, "when I first took to the
business, there was a great deal of low stuff that did VERy well to make
folks laugh; but was nEVER calculated to improve the morals of young people,
which certainly ought to be principally aimed at in EVERy puppet-show: for
why may not good and instructive lessons be conveyed this way, as well as
any other? My figures are as big as the life, and they represent the life in
EVERy particular; and I question not but people rise from my little drama as
much improved as they do from the great." "I would by no means degrade the
ingenuity of your profession," answered Jones, "but I should have been glad
to have seen my old acquaintance master PUNCH, for all that; and so far
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. Micawber roused me from this reflection, which was blended with a
certain remorseful apprehension of seeing Steerforth himself, by bestowing
many ENCOMIUMS on the absent Littimer as a most respectable fellow,
"But PUNCH, my dear Copperfield," said Mr. Micawber,
------------------------------------------------------
by William Wordsworth
Of the ENCOMIUMS by my Friend pronounced
On humble life, forbid the judging mind
To trust the smiling aspect of this fair
And noiseless commonwealth.
"What needs my Shakspeare for his honoured bones
The labour of an age in piled stones,
Or that his hallowed reliques should be hid
Under a star-ypointing pyramid?
Dear Son of Memory, great Heir of Fame,
What need'st thou such weak witness of thy name?
Thou in our wonder and astonishment
Hast built thyself a livelong monument,
And so sepulchred, in such pomp dost lie,
That kings for such a tomb would wish to die."
------------------------------------------------------
> > > > David McCullough: "The strange, difficult, contradictory man
> > > > who emerges as the real Shakespeare, Edward de Vere,
> > > > the 17th Earl of Oxford, is not just plausible
> > > > but fascinating and wholly believable.
> > > > It is hard to imagine anyone who reads
> > > > the book with an open mind ever seeing Shakespeare
> > > > or his works in the same way again"
> > > > (From the Foreword to the second edition of
> > > > The Mysterious William Shakespeare by Charlton Ogburn)
> >
> > > Mark Alexander <mark a...@earthlink.net> wrote:
> >
> > > > [McCullough's] Oxfordian position
> > > > seems not to have damaged his credibility.
> >
> > David Webb:
> >
> > > McCullough's well-deserved success, while a cause for
> > > jubilant celebration among those who admire his work in his area of
> > > professional expertise, is irrelevant to the question of who wrote the
> > > works of Shakespeare; I doubt that any reasonable person would view
> > > McCullough's success as "bad news," whatever his or her opinion
> > > concerning Shakespeare authorship might be.
>
> > And what EXACTLY is DNB contributor
> > David Kathman's area of professional expertise??
> As you would know if you were paying attention, Art,
> Dave's Ph.D. is in linguistics.
> history of the Elizabethan theatre, and he has been quite successful --
> his work appears in major peer-reviewed publications, and as you noted
> above, he has even contributed to the DNB. His credentials as literary
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
<<It's 1961 and Dr. Paul Armstrong and his lovely wife Betty head into the
mountains in search of a recently fallen meteor containing the rare element
atmospherium. Paul hopes it contains atmospherium, a rare element that will
contribute much to science. Also in the area, sinister Dr. Roger Fleming
asks trusty Ranger Brad the whereabouts of Cadavra Cave, mysterious home
what appears to be yet another meteor falling. Immediately after, a local
farmer is killed by a horrible, unseen thing. Is there a connection? Indeed
there is. The second meteor is actually a disabled alien spaceship with a
strange couple from the planet Marva: Krobar and Lattis. These aliens
discover they also need atmospherium to power their really high tech ship,
and notice their horrible pet mutant, which they travel around with for some
reason, has escaped. Unfortunately, Dr. Fleming discovers he also needs
Elizabeth
positions of authority
he would have renounced his Oxfordian stance by now."
You don't know if he hasn't 'renounced his Oxfordian stance.' Nelson's
book won't have any impact with the public but it will have an impact
in academia.
McCollough's 'stance' is nothing new in historians. The eminent
classical scholar Sir Moses I Finley wrote a brilliant little work in
which he exposed the infiltration of four ideological historiographies
into classical scholarship. Historians are as susceptible to 'the
books that kill people' as are literary scholars, physicists,
philosophers and composers of operas.. We refuse to take rhetoric
seriously but it has the power to destroy cultures and whole planetary
environments. What has this to do with Oxfordianism? It's another
ideology, one that won't rule the planet but it will be in the service
of the New Feudalism just as Stratfordianism was lackey to racist
imperialist colonialism. The rhetoric is in place. Marx' stinkin'
manifesto--what is it--a few pages?--killed a hundred million peasants.
Rhetoric is a matter of life and death but we prefer to be entranced by
it rather than deconstruct it and save ourselves.
Cordially,
Elizabeth
Art Neuendorffer
> Art wrote: "If (McCollough) was as spineless
> as most people in positions of authority
> he would have renounced his Oxfordian stance by now."
>
> You don't know if he hasn't 'renounced his Oxfordian stance.'
I've seen no evidence that he has; have you?
> Nelson's book won't have any impact with the public
> but it will have an impact in academia.
Like Jones's bio of 'Laurens Van Der Post' perhaps?
-----------------------------------------------------------
'Storyteller: The Many Lives Of Laurens Van Der Post'
By J. D. F. Jones, John Murray, £25, pp.505, ISBN:0719555809
http://www.daimon.ch/vanderPost.jpg
-----------------------------------------------------------
As reviewed by Christopher Booker:
<< [J. D. F. Jones] set out single-mindedly to strip away
every last shred of the reputation of the man whom
the headline to his 1983 review had called ''van der Posture'.
It must be the only occasion in history when someone has managed
to hijack the position of 'authorised biographer' to produce
what is nothing but an utterly ruthless hatchet job.
So relentless is [his] denigration that it reminds one just how easy
it is to turn anyone's life into a negative caricature if one sets out
to do so. And one is soon aware that a biography conceived on these
lines presents Jones with two problems. Firstly, he is so determined not
to see anything positive in his subject that he goes way over the top,
And when Jones is eager to recycle any salacious anecdote about
Laurens's love-life, however distorted or improbable, it is almost
comical how much less demanding he is of the evidence for his own
stories than he is for those told by the man he obsessively tries to
blacken as a fantasist and a liar.
A much larger problem for Jones is that he is wholly incapable of
understanding those qualities in Laurens which evoked such extraordinary
response from millions of readers, such love from his wide circle of
friends, and which gave him his unique position in the inner life of our
age. . .All this positive side of Laurens has passed Jones by. There are
times in his joyless, pedestrian book when one feels some editorial hand
intervening to suggest he is being too one-sided. Suddenly we get a few
rather forced sentences conceding that Laurens did have his admirers,
or that such and such a book was not wholly without merit. It is
interesting that even Jones cannot hide how, in those hellish Javanese
prison camps, his fellow POWs regarded Col. van der Post as a brave,
resourceful and inspiring leader of men who performed wonders in
sustaining morale. But when it comes to explaining why Laurens rose from
being 'just a farm boy from the Karoo', as the book snobbishly opens, to
being admired all over the world and a guide, comforter and friend to
Prince Charles, Mrs Thatcher and so many others, all Jones can offer
as an explanation, again and again, is that he had 'charm'.
I suspect the potential readers of a life of van der Post would
prefer rather more than this as an explanation for why he left such a
mark on the world, which is why the publishers may be disappointed
by the book's sales. Ultimately this book exposes the limitations
not of van der Post, only of its author. But at least Mr Jones has
served one invaluable purpose. In digging up every scrap of dirt
which anyone could find to throw at Laurens, whether real or
imaginary, he has cleared the decks for some other author to
write that grown-up account which the 'authorised biography'
of such a remarkable figure should have been in the first place.
© The Spectator, 20 October 2001, Christopher Booker. >>
-----------------------------------------------------------
David L. Webb
"Art Neuendorffer" <aneuendor...@comcast.net> wrote:
> "Elizabeth" <elizabe...@mail.com> wrote:
>
> > Art wrote: "If (McCollough) was as spineless
> > as most people in positions of authority
> > he would have renounced his Oxfordian stance by now."
> >
> > You don't know if he hasn't 'renounced his Oxfordian stance.'
>
> I've seen no evidence that he has; have you?
Come on, Art -- you've read Elizabeth long enough by now to know that
she doesn't need any evidence!
[...]
Elizabeth
to know that
she doesn't need any evidence!"
I'm so proud of you, my little protege. My long efforts to introduce
the concept of 'evidence' into this forum are rewarded. The hypocrisy
is a little galling, however.
Cordially,
Elizabeth
Elizabeth
There's no public interest in Nelson's book.
Nelson has his facts straight, Art. My problem with Nelson's book,
other than the fact that Nelson omits facts he should have included, is
that Nelson ignores the entire context of Oxford's life. Oxford wasn't
a member of some historical recreation society in Kansas, he was born
in England during the worst religious schism up to that time. In the
Nelson version, Oxford is deprived of all motive.
You sound like you have a grudge against Nelson.
Cordially,
Elizabeth
Art Neuendorffer
> Art wrote:"Like Jones's bio of 'Laurens Van Der Post' perhaps?"
>
> There's no public interest in Nelson's book.
>
> Nelson has his facts straight, Art.
I don't know what you mean by "facts," Elizabeth.
> My problem with Nelson's book,
> other than the fact that Nelson omits facts he should have included, is
> that Nelson ignores the entire context of Oxford's life. Oxford wasn't
> a member of some historical recreation society in Kansas, he was born
> in England during the worst religious schism up to that time. In the
> Nelson version, Oxford is deprived of all motive.
>
> You sound like you have a grudge against Nelson.
I think Oxfordians bend over backwards to be nice
to Nelson, Ross & Grumman. They certainly don't
deserve it.I'm simply trying to provide some balance.
Art N.
David L. Webb
"Art Neuendorffer" <aneuendor...@comcast.net>
(aneuendor...@comicass.nut) wrote:
[...]
> > > Better that we rely instead upon a "linguist" from Chicago:
> > > --------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > "David Kathman" <dj...@ix.netcom.com> wrote
> > >
> > > > I'm sure [Webb] is as thrilled as I am at such ENCOMIA (sic).
> > > --------------------------------------------------------------------
> "David L. Webb" <david....@dartmouth.edu> wrote
>
> > I've already corrected this error of yours on the other thread, Art.
> "ENKOMION" : It's GREEK NOT LATIN!!
The word we are discussing is "encomium," not "enkomion," Art --
although of course I would not expect you to be able to distinguish the
two; "enkomion" (the ultimate origin of "encomium") is Greek, but the
word "encomium" is Late Latin, and in that form the word made its way to
English.
Get someone to read the OED etymology of the word to you, Art:
"[a. L. enco~mium, ad. Gr. () eulogy.]"
Just as in the case I mentioned (the English plural of the originally
Russian word "balalaika"), words naturalized into Latin via Greek did
not necessarily retain their original Greek plurals. Thus words that
were originally Greek but entered English via Latin often have two or
three plural forms, one a Greek-style plural form, another a Latin-style
plural form, and sometimes another Emglish-style plural form. The
example of "octopus" is instructive: the natural Greek plural would be
"octopodes"; however, the word entered English via scientific Latin, so
it also possesses the Latin-style plural "octopi" as well as the
English-style plural "octopuses." Indeed, the OED explains:
"Plural *octopuses*, *octopi*, (rare) *octopodes*"
"The plural form _octopodes_ reflects the Greek plural; cf. OCTOPOD n.
The more frequent plural form _octopi_ arises from apprehension of the
final _-us_ of the word as the grammatical ending of Latin second
declension nouns; this apprehension is also reflected in compounds in
_octop-_: see e.g. OCTOPEAN a., OCTOPIC a., OCTOPINE a., etc.]"
Of course, I realize that you have no idea what a "book" is, Art,
that the closest approximation to reading of which you are capable is
grepping online, and that you are unlikely to have online access to the
OED, so for your benefit, I will suggest also the link
<http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?search=encomium&searchmode=none>,
where you will find the following etymology:
"1589, from L.L. encomium, from Gk. enkomion (epos) 'laudatory (ode),
eulogy,' from en- 'in' + komos 'banquet, procession, merrymaking.'"
I realize, of course, that you are utterly incapable of clicking the
link that explains the abbreviation "L.L.," so I will reproduce the
explanation for you, Art:
"L.L. Late Latin, the literary Latin language as spoken and written
c.300-c.700."
Moreover, should you eVER aspire to learn to read rather than grep, you
might take a look at other etymological dictionaries as well, Art. For
example, I have on my shelf Eric Partridge's short etymological English
dictionary _Origins_, in which one finds the following etymology:
"encomiastic, encomium
The former derives from Gr _enkomiastikos_, eulogistic, the adj of
_enkomion_, formed of _en_, in + _komos_, a revel (f.a.e., COMEDY),
and yielding L, whence E, _encomium_."
For your edification, Art, "L" above is an abbreviation for "Latin" and
"E" is an abbreviation for "English."
Simply put, Art, you cannot read -- not that I am disclosing anything
new.
> Show me ONE reputable author who uses "ENCOMIA"
You're the self-proclaimed master of the search engine, Art --
although without the ability to read the search results, your putative
mastery does not sERVe you VERy well; even you ought to be able to find
abundant examples online. HoweVER, since it evidently did not even
occur to you to look (or you were too incompetent to interpret the
results), I will provide a few:
(1) <http://libnt2.lib.tcu.edu/staff/bellinger/faculty/balch-bib.htm>
Here we find the online bibliography of David Balch, Professor of New
Testament, Brite Divinity School -- incidentally, Art, do you happen to
know in what langauge the New Testament is written? Of course you
don't. It is Greek. One of Balch's articles is entitled
"Two Apologetic Encomia: Dionysius on Rome and Josephus on the Jews."
Should you eVER visit a library, Art, you can find the paper in _Journal
for the Study of Judaism in the Persian, Hellenistic and Roman Period_
13 (1982), 102-22.
(2) <http://berlin.wolf.ox.ac.uk/published_works/singles/bib42.pdf>
Here is a sentence written by none other than the celebrated Isaiah
Berlin, one of the great men of letters and historians of ideas of the
twentieth century:
"He [Prince Mirsky] lavished magnificent encomia upon authors, who,
for reasons not always clear, delighted or excited him, and launched
violent personal attacks on writers both great and small, men of
genius and forgotten hacks, who happened to bore or annoy him."
I realize, of course, that the likelihood of your being able even to
download, much less read, a .pdf file is negligible, Art; howeVER, even
you ought to be able to grep the html VERsion:
<http://64.233.161.104/search?q=cache:rwFSS-mt6tQJ:berlin.wolf.ox.ac.uk/p
ublished_works/singles/bib42.pdf+encomia+historian&hl=en>.
(3) <http://www.mcmaster.ca/mjtm/5-r2.htm>
Here you can read (or rather, grep) the following sentence, Art:
"The contributors freely move beyond merely bestowing _encomia_ to
examine George Rawlykąs 'wrinkles.'"
The REView was written by C. Mark Steinacher, lecturer in church
history, historiography, and ecclesiology at McMaster Divinity College.
(4) <http://ccat.sas.upenn.edu/bmcr/1994/94.10.06.html>
Here is an example from the Bryn Mawr Classical REView; the REView in
question was written by Donald Lateiner, the John R. Wright Professor of
Humanities-Classics (1979) and Department Chair at Ohio Wesleyan
University. It contains the following sentence:
"Chapter 9 deals with humor: paradoxography such as encomia of
baldness and fleas, five encomia of Thersites, the misuse and abuse
of Marathon and Alexander the not-so-Great, Homer as polymath, and
other trivia that make the television quiz-show 'Jeopardy' look like
happy Mondays in the school of Aristotle."
(5) <http://www.acls.org/op27.htm>
Here is a paper entitled "Rethinking Literary History ‹ Comparatively"
by Mario J. Valdés and Linda Hutcheon, a publication of the American
Council of Learned Societies. Mario J. Valdés holds the Chair in
Iberoamerican Studies at the University of Toronto, while Linda
Hutcheon, PhD, FRSC, D.Litt.(hon), LLD (hon), etc. is a chaired
Professor of English and Comparative Literature at the University of
Toronto and a member of the American Academy of Arts and Science. In
their article, one finds:
"Among the other concerns permitted and even provoked by a
comparative approach would be the relation between nationhood and
literary forms (epics, chronicles, utopian visions, hymns, encomia,
philosophical discourses)."
(6) <http://web.clas.ufl.edu/users/tjohnson/tj/symposionintroduction.htm>
Here you can find the following sentences, Art:
"Horace has sustained the witty complexities in his encomia."
"We should also expect Horatian encomia, like Horatian symposia, to
be seriocomic, which in turn means that they are prone to incorporate
conflicting points of view and tone (chapter 2)."
"To answer three possible criticisms -- (1) I have not arranged the
book according to particular instances of the sympotic within the
encomia of _Odes_ IV."
"This division allows my reading of the encomia to begin where Horace
began his book, with the praise of the young nobles."
Their author is Timothy Johnson, Associate Professor of Classics,
University of Florida.
I realize, of course, that you have not even grepped -- let alone
actually *read* -- enough English to have even the vaguest idea what the
lexicon of "reputable authors" is like, and that moreoVER English is not
even your native tongue, Art. HoweVER, I would have expected that even
a moron like aneuendor...@comicass.nut would have been able to
use a search engine to refute his own idiotic dicta. Or do you prefer
"dictums," or perhaps "dictopodes," Art? HoweVER, in view of one of
your funniest and most preposterous pronouncements, I certainly should
have known better:
"I would really be interested to know, Dave, if you can find the
pejorative words: CRANK, CRACKPOT, PATHETIC or THOROUGHLY
SELF-DELUDED in any of Martin Gardner's other works. I rather doubt
it! The mild mannered & erudite Mr. Gardner does NOT talk (much less
write) in this manner."
<http://groups-beta.google.com/group/humanities.lit.authors.shakespeare/m
sg/f7bba0b585106d2e?dmode=source>.
Incidentally, Art -- in view of your insistence that "enkomion" is a
Greek word, just what do you think that its Greek plural *should* be?
Congratulations, Art -- you have demonstrated pretty conclusively
that an international airport would not suffice to get you into Lehigh.
You'd better up the ante and throw in a 36-hole golf course as well. In
fact, I'm beginning to wonder how you got into George Mason Elementary
School, Art -- did your uncle endow the library or something?
[Irrelevant lunatic logorrhea snipped]
Tom Reedy
acknowledgment, David.
Art, along with the rest of the antiStratfordians, cannot bear to
contemplate the idea that they are wrong and that they've been wasting their
lives in their "research." The rational response would be to salvage what
time they have left in more profitable pursuits, but their particular form
of mental illness precludes them from that action. Instead, they throw good
after bad by engaging in ever more "research" to justify their life's waste.
At least somebody's getting a laugh out of it, so their efforts aren't a
complete waste.
TR
"David L. Webb" <david....@dartmouth.edu> wrote in message
news:david.l.webb-84F7...@merrimack.dartmouth.edu...
David L. Webb
"Art Neuendorffer" <aneuendor...@comcast.net>
(aneuendor...@comicass.nut) wrote:
[...]
> Show me ONE reputable author who uses "ENCOMIA"
I don't know about "reputable," Art, but here's one that you should
particularly savor. It comes from
<http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/muchado/etc/script.html>,
the transcript of the PBS Frontline show on Michael Rubbo's Marlovian
mockumentary "Much Ado About Something." One of the Marlovians
interviewed was the late Dolly Walker Wraight, of whom even you must
have heard, Art -- her final book _The Legend of Hiram_ concerns the
supposed links among Marlowe, Shakespeare and the Freemasons. In the
transcript, Wraight is quoted as follows:
"DOLLY WALKER WRAIGHT: And what is even more curious is that in that
time, when William Shakespeare died, in 1616, it was unheard of,
absolutely unheard of for even a minor poet to pass away without all
these encomia and accolades from his fellow poets-"
In the other thread, you wrote:
"Only incompetent literary historians who are pretending
to sound sophisticated engage in this practice."
If you want to pronounce Dolly Wraight "incompetent," it's quite all
right with me, Art -- but you may have to take the matter up with Peter
Farey, Dave More, and others.
David L. Webb
"Tom Reedy" <reed...@earthlink.net> wrote:
> This is great stuff, but I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for an
> acknowledgment, David.
I'm not. It would be like waiting for Faker to acknowledge that his
"solution" of Fermat's Last Theorem is nonsense.
> Art, along with the rest of the antiStratfordians, cannot bear to
> contemplate the idea that they are wrong and that they've been wasting their
> lives in their "research." The rational response would be to salvage what
> time they have left in more profitable pursuits,
Not Art! Indeed, Art's posts already constitute such a huge
proportion of the posts to this newgroup that typing "Neuendorffer" in
the Author field doesn't appreciably speed up a Google Groups search.
> but their particular form
> of mental illness precludes them from that action. Instead, they throw good
> after bad by engaging in ever more "research" to justify their life's waste.
>
> At least somebody's getting a laugh out of it, so their efforts aren't a
> complete waste.
Indeed. It is quite evident that Art hasn't read very much English,
as is readily apparent from his comic misuse of that tongue in this
forum. What is *really* funny, though, is that he confidently issues
pronouncements like
"Only incompetent literary historians have ever used 'ENCOMIA'",
blithely unaware that the word is used not only by distinguished figures
like Isaiah Berlin, but even by anti-Stratfordians like Dolly Wraight
whom Art is fond of quoting. What is funnier still is that Art is
apparently incapable of finding out things like this himself by the
simple expedient of visiting a library or using a search engine! Thus
"research" in Art's case is certainly an oxymoron -- as is Art himself.
Art Neuendorffer
> > > > Better that we rely instead upon a "linguist" from Chicago:
> > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > "David Kathman" <dj...@ix.netcom.com> wrote
> > > >
> > > > > I'm sure [Webb] is as thrilled as I am at such ENCOMIA (sic).
> > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> > "David L. Webb" <david....@dartmouth.edu> wrote
> >
> > > I've already corrected this error of yours on the other thread, Art.
> > "ENKOMION" : It's GREEK NOT LATIN!!
> although of course I would not expect you to be able to distinguish the
> two; "enkomion" (the ultimate origin of "encomium") is Greek,
> but the word "encomium" is Late Latin, and in that form the word
> made its way to English.
mountains in search of a recently fallen meteor containing the rare element
what appears to be yet another meteor falling. Immediately after, a local
farmer is killed by a horrible, unseen thing. Is there a connection? Indeed
there is. The second meteor is actually a disabled alien spaceship with a
strange couple from the planet Marva: Krobar and Lattis. These aliens
reason, has escaped. Unfortunately, Dr. Fleming discovers he also needs
http://www.haro-online.com/movies/lost_skeleton_cadavra.html ...
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> "[a. L. enco~mium, ad. Gr. () eulogy.]"
>
> Just as in the case I mentioned (the English plural of the originally
> Russian word "balalaika"), words naturalized into Latin via Greek did
> not necessarily retain their original Greek plurals. Thus words that
> were originally Greek but entered English via Latin often have two or
> three plural forms, one a Greek-style plural form, another a Latin-style
> plural form, and sometimes another Emglish-style plural form.
> however, the word entered English via scientific Latin, so
> it also possesses the Latin-style plural "octopi" as well as the
> English-style plural "octopuses." Indeed, the OED explains:
>
> "Plural *octopuses*, *octopi*, (rare) *octopodes*"
>
> "The plural form _octopodes_ reflects the Greek plural; cf. OCTOPOD n.
> The more frequent plural form _octopi_ arises
> _octop-_: see e.g. OCTOPEAN a., OCTOPIC a., OCTOPINE a., etc.]"
John W. Kennedy wrote:
and that OCTOPI is misconceived and octopodes pedantic. OCTOPI derives
> that the closest approximation to reading of which you are capable is
> grepping online, and that you are unlikely to have online access
> to the OED, so for your benefit, I will suggest also the link
>
> <http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?search=encomium&searchmode=none>,
>
> where you will find the following etymology:
>
> "1589, from L.L. encomium, from Gk. enkomion (epos) 'laudatory (ode),
> eulogy,' from en- 'in' + komos 'banquet, procession, merrymaking.'"
>
> I realize, of course, that you are utterly incapable of clicking the
> link that explains the abbreviation "L.L.," so I will reproduce the
> explanation for you, Art:
>
> "L.L. Late Latin, the literary Latin language
> as spoken and written c.300-c.700."
> might take a look at other etymological dictionaries as well, Art. For
> example, I have on my shelf Eric Partridge's short etymological English
> dictionary _Origins_, in which one finds the following etymology:
> The former derives from Gr _enKOMIastikos_, eulogistic, the adj of
> _enKOMIon_, formed of _en_, in + _KOMos_, a revel
> (f.a.e., COMEDY), and yielding L, whence E, _enCOMIum_."
> > Show me ONE reputable author who uses "ENCOMIA"
> David Balch, Professor of New Testament, Brite Divinity School
>
> Isaiah Berlin, one of the great men of letters of the twentieth century:
>
> "He [Prince Mirsky] lavished magnificent ENCOMIA upon authors, who,
> for reasons not always clear, delighted or excited him, and launched
> violent personal attacks on writers both great and small, men of
> genius and forgotten hacks, who happened to bore or annoy him."
>
> C. Mark Steinacher, lecturer in church history,
> historiography, and ecclesiology at McMaster Divinity College.
> (4) Donald Lateiner, the John R. Wright Professor of Humanities
> - Classics (1979) and Department Chair at Ohio Wesleyan University
> "Chapter 9 deals with humor: paradoxography such as ENCOMIA of
> baldness and fleas, five ENCOMIA of Thersites, the misuse and abuse
> of Marathon and Alexander the not-so-Great, Homer as polymath, and
> other trivia that make the television quiz-show 'Jeopardy' look like
> happy Mondays in the school of Aristotle."
>
> at the University of Toronto, while Linda Hutcheon, PhD,
> of English and Comparative Literature at the University of Toronto
> and a member of the American Academy of Arts and Science.
>
> (6) Timothy Johnson, Associate Prof. of Classics, Univ. of Florida.
>
> "Horace has sustained the witty complexities in his ENCOMIA."
>
> I have not arranged the book according to particular instances
>
> "This division allows my reading of the ENCOMIA to begin where
> Horace began his book, with the praise of the young nobles."
> Greek word, just what do you think that its Greek plural *should* be?
------------------------------------------------------------------
EVERy other enjoyment malice may destroy; EVERy other
I have got enough of the old masters! Brown says he has "shook" them,
> that an international airport would not suffice to get you into Lehigh.
> You'd better up the ante and throw in a 36-hole golf course as well. In
> fact, I'm beginning to wonder how you got into George Mason Elementary
> School, Art -- did your uncle endow the library or something?
Art Neuendorffer
> > Show me ONE reputable author who uses "ENCOMIA"
"David L. Webb" <david....@dartmouth.edu> wrote
> I don't know about "reputable," Art, but here's one
> that you should particularly savor. It comes from
>
> <http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/muchado/etc/script.html>,
>
> the transcript of the PBS Frontline show on Michael Rubbo's Marlovian
> mockumentary "Much Ado About Something." One of the Marlovians
> interviewed was the late Dolly Walker Wraight, of whom even you must
> have heard, Art -- her final book _The Legend of Hiram_ concerns the
> supposed links among Marlowe, Shakespeare and the Freemasons.
> In the transcript, Wraight is quoted as follows:
>
> "DOLLY WALKER WRAIGHT: And what is even more curious is that
> in that time, when William Shakespeare died, in 1616, it was unheard
of,
> absolutely unheard of for even a minor poet to pass away without all
> these encomia and accolades from his fellow poets-"
>
> In the other thread, you wrote:
>
> "Only incompetent literary historians who are pretending
> to sound sophisticated engage in this practice."
>
> If you want to pronounce Dolly Wraight "incompetent," it's quite all
> right with me, Art -- but you may have to take the matter up with
> Peter Farey, Dave More, and others.
ALL Marlovians are by definition "incompetent"
Kit Marlowe was as phoney as the Stratman.
Art Neuendorffer
Art Neuendorffer
thanks for the compliment, but as you know, who we debate is out of
our hands. I got an e-mail from the Trust & was assigned Foelster just as
soon as his name appeared on the ng. Boy, I'm glad I was taken off Crowley:
the man is too well-read & intelligent, it was all I could do to keep up
with
him. I'm damn glad they've never given me Art to debate; I feel sorry for
poor David. Of course that new anagram program they have is sure coming in
handy for him, but I *NEVER* want to go toe-to-toe with Art--he knows
too much, although I doubt if he's even aware of all he knows.
Hey, I finally got the check. Something about a computer virus in the
mainframe at Stratford. I was glad to see it--the rent was overdue
& I had to pay a late fee.
Sorry about that last e-mail appearing on the ng.
Apparently I hit "post" instead of "e-mail." It won't happen again.
My 14-year-old is giving me trouble--the usual ersatz teenage angst. He
doesn't want to accept his occupation being already chosen for him. I told
him it was like the Phantom--the ghost who walks--& that it was an honor to
be born into a family with a 400-year old mission, but he just sulks off &
gets on the computer. I'm sure he'll come around--we all do, eventually.
Meanwhile all he does is play on the computer (he's a real whiz at
programming) & mutters about how he's going to "fix me" & about
some grandoise plan he has to "expose the truth to the world."
Yeah, right, that'll be the day, hey Bob?
Who do you think is going to get the old monument in April? Schoenbaum
had it for so long I think they almost completely forgot about it. I vote
for
Matus--he deserves it. I've heard some say that Dave or Terry should get it,
but they're a little young yet, I think. I know damn well it'll be years
before I'm eligible, not to mention that whoever gets it keeps it for life.
Say, before they ship it to whomever they give it to we should all gather
around it & have our picture taken & send it to Kennedy! I'd want to pose
atop the woolsack. Wouldn't that be a hoot! I bet the old fart would think
he was having the DTs! If a picture could be printed with some type of
disappearing ink that couldn't be copied it would be worth it. Maybe he'd
have a heart attack or something & we'd be rid of that thorn in the side
& make our jobs a lot easier.
Well, that's about it for now. Brenda says to tell the family "hi"
& that we'll see you all in Stratford in April.>>
David L. Webb
"Art Neuendorffer" <aneuendor...@comcast.net>
(aneuendor...@comicass.nut) wrote:
Then someone who was tempted to send in advance payment for Wraight's
_The Legend of Hiram_ must be a demented moron -- right, Art?
<http://groups-beta.google.com/group/humanities.lit.authors.shakespeare/m
sg/8e4cf6de3d6fe15a?dmode=source>
David L. Webb
"Art Neuendorffer" <aneuendor...@comcast.net>
(aneuendor...@comicass.nut) wrote:
One hesitates to explain a joke -- but in the case of a demented
moron like aneuendor...@comicass.nut, it can't be helped.
Art Neuendorffer
"David L. Webb" <david....@dartmouth.edu> wrote
> One hesitates to explain a joke -- but in the case of a demented
> moron like aneuendor...@comicass.nut, it can't be helped.
Moron, n.; Sp. pl. {Morones}. [Sp.] An inferior olive size having
a woody pulp and a large clingstone pit, growing in the mountainous
and high-valley districts around the city of Moron, in Spain.
Art Neuendorffer
P.S., Brenda says to tell the family "hi"
Art Neuendorffer
> > > If you want to pronounce Dolly Wraight "incompetent," it's quite all
> > > right with me, Art -- but you may have to take the matter up with
> > > Peter Farey, Dave More, and others.
> "Art Neuendorffer" <aneuendor...@comcast.net>
> > ALL Marlovians are by definition "incompetent"
> >
> > Kit Marlowe was as phoney as the Stratman.
"David L. Webb" <david....@dartmouth.edu> wrote
> Then someone who was tempted to send in advance payment for
> Wraight's _The Legend of Hiram_ must be a demented moron -- right, Art?
>
>
<http://groups-beta.google.com/group/humanities.lit.authors.shakespeare/msg/
8e4cf6de3d6fe15a?dmode=source>
Anyone who was tempted to send $121.80 in advance payment, absolutely!
Art N.
Peter Farey
David L. Webb wrote:
>
> Art Neuendorffer wrote:
Wraight's competence as a literary historian was, in my
opinion, very questionable, but never her competence in
the use of correct English, for which she was a stickler.
Peter F.
pet...@rey.prestel.co.uk
http://www2.prestel.co.uk/rey/index.htm
Peter Farey
David L. Webb wrote:
>
> Then someone who was tempted to send in advance
> payment for Wraight's _The Legend of Hiram_ must
> be a demented moron -- right, Art?
>
>
<http://groups-beta.google.com/group/humanities.lit.authors.shakespeare/msg/
8e4cf6de3d6fe15a?dmode=source>
Whilst 'demented moron' is probably overstating it, any
payment at this stage would seem to be unwise, given
that the book has yet to be published. I understand that
some members of the Committee of the UK Marlowe
Society are hoping to accomplish this eventually, but,
as Tom Reedy said in another context, I wouldn't hold
my breath.
Peter Farey
Tom Reedy wrote:
>
> This is great stuff, but I wouldn't hold my breath
> waiting for an acknowledgment, David.
>
> Art, along with the rest of the antiStratfordians,
> cannot bear to contemplate the idea that they are
> wrong and that they've been wasting their lives in
> their "research." The rational response would be to
> salvage what time they have left in more profitable
> pursuits, but their particular form of mental
> illness precludes them from that action. Instead,
> they throw good after bad by engaging in ever more
> "research" to justify their life's waste.
And some of us try to engage in a civilized discussion
concerning our theories. Unfortunately, there are too
many around like you, Tom, who (for example) upon
being asked over three weeks ago to explain why you
had said that I had used "faulty reasoning" in my paper
on the monument, just scuttled back into the woodwork,
to resume your mindless abuse of anti-Stratfordians in
general and Elizabeth in particular.
Peter Farey
Bob Grumman wrote:
>
> Tom Reedy wrote:
> >
> > Art, along with the rest of the antiStratfordians,
> > cannot bear to contemplate the idea that they are
> > wrong and that they've been wasting their lives in
> > their "research." The rational response would be to
> > salvage what time they have left in more profitable
> > pursuits, but their particular form of mental
> > illness precludes them from that action. Instead,
> > they throw good after bad by engaging in ever more
> > "research" to justify their life's waste.
> They are also providing wonderfully detailed examples
> of cerebral dysfunctionality for psychologists and
> other students of irrationality.
Bob, what excellent timing! A perfect example of yet
another who dives for cover as soon as the questions
get too difficult. Oh, and 'insane' by any other name
smells just as vile.
Remember this? It was only a couple of weeks ago.
<quote>
Bob Grumman wrote:
>
> Your probability ignores the fact that there are
> thousands of texts you could use to find secret
> messages in,
'My' probability is that of the same seven words being
randomly selected twice from a text of seventy words.
It has nothing whatever to do with other texts. Just as
our weekly lottery result has nothing to do with the
results on other weeks. You may well find this boring,
Bob, but it is at the heart of my case, so you had
better understand it.
And there are not 'thousands of texts' like this one,
of course. This one is specially significant, as you
keep on reminding us. For example, remember these?
(dd/mm/yy)
So what? There is plentiful very strong, uncontra-
dicted DIRECT CONCRETE EVIDENCE that he was, his
monument's speaking of "all that he hath writ."
(16/08/01)
The allusions to him in the First Folio and on his
monument are a great deal more important, and there
are many others as important. (26/12/01)
There IS direct evidence against it--such as the
First Folio, the monument, (13/01/02)
No, I don't assume; I KNOW that he is described as
a writer on his monument. (02/04/02)
From the point of view of direct evidence, Digges's
reference to Shakespeare the poet's STRATFORD
monument is much stronger evidence than anything
Jonson said. (02/04/02)
Is the statement on the monument to the William
Shakespeare of Stratford who died 23 April 1616
that speaks of all he wrote not direct evidence
that he wrote something? (28/09/02)
People who must have included at least some who had
known him, put up a monument to him that praised him
as a poet. Etc. (09/01/03)
The monument is direct evidence (26/04/03)
we have the testimony of the monument, which says
he wrote. (17/10/03)
The key to the identity of the author of the Shake-
speare works is such factually uncontradicted direct
evidence as the testimony of the title pages, the
Stratford monument, Shakespeare's will, various
other writers, etc. (05/10/03)
Who cares? [The monument is] direct evidence
that you can't refute except by simply saying that
it's a lie or mistake, with no evidence to support
your contention. (12/11/2003)
> hundreds of arbitrary games you could play with the
> words in those texts--besides the anagrams, crossword
> synonyms, picture words, different-sized letters, and
> the like that you have used here--and at least a
> thousand messages that could be found that would
> qualify as a "solution" (especially if the awkward,
> ambiguous message you have found here counts).
The message I claim to have found is no more awkward
and ambiguous than the original.
> I would say that the odds are better than even that
> a person could come up with a message "proving" his
> candidate wrote the plays of Shakespeare doing what
> you did. That I'm right is verified by the plenitude
> of differently-arrived-at secret messages that have
> indeed been found, and seem as valid to their finders
> as your message seems to you.
The probability of the same seven words being randomly
selected twice from a text of seventy words is less
than one in one thousand million. Who else is there
that you know of who presents a *clue* to finding their
hidden text with this level of probability?
<end quote>
Any chance of your dealing with any of these points
one day? (I know, but one can live in hope).
bobgr...@nut-n-but.net
Tom Reedy wrote:
> This is great stuff, but I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for an
> acknowledgment, David.
>
> Art, along with the rest of the antiStratfordians, cannot bear to
> contemplate the idea that they are wrong and that they've been
wasting their
> lives in their "research." The rational response would be to salvage
what
> time they have left in more profitable pursuits, but their particular
form
> of mental illness precludes them from that action. Instead, they
throw good
> after bad by engaging in ever more "research" to justify their life's
waste.
>
> At least somebody's getting a laugh out of it, so their efforts
aren't a
> complete waste.
>
> TR
They are also providing wonderfully detailed examples of cerebral
dysfunctionality for psychologists and other students of irrationality.
--Bob G.
bobgr...@nut-n-but.net
when I first got it. I have to admit that the anti-Stratfordians'
ability to inspire entertainment like this IS more important than the
exemplification of irrationality that they provide.
--Bob G.
(Note: the monument actually ended being awarded to Art Neuendorffer,
or so the documents indicate. He never received it. The scuttlebutt
around the Trust is that Paul Crowley intercepted it somehow, enraged
because he was sure he had been doing twice as good a job at bringing
down anti-Stratfordianism as Art, but no one's been able to get the
goods on him.)
Art Neuendorffer
Art Neuendorffer
> >
> > Then someone who was tempted to send in advance
> > payment for Wraight's _The Legend of Hiram_ must
> > be a demented moron -- right, Art?
"Peter Farey" <Peter...@prst17z1.demon.co.uk> wrote
> Whilst 'demented moron' is probably overstating it, any
> payment at this stage would seem to be unwise, given
> that the book has yet to be published. I understand that
> some members of the Committee of the UK Marlowe
> Society are hoping to accomplish this eventually, but,
> as Tom Reedy said in another context, I wouldn't hold
> my breath.
Interesting that a number of used copies are supposedly for sale:
http://www.fetchbook.info/search_A._D._Wraight/searchBy_Author.html
Are people selling there advanced orders?
Art N.
Elizabeth
I know you don't know what I mean by "facts."
Fondly,
Elizabeth
Art Neuendorffer
"David L. Webb" <david....@dartmouth.edu> wrote
> One hesitates to explain a joke -- but in the case of a demented
> moron like aneuendor...@comicass.nut, it can't be helped.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Well, it certainly appears to be a joke... tweaking, as it does,
Crowley, Kennedy & myself all in the same message...but is it Reedy's
joke or his son's? And what are we (much less bewildered newbies) to
make of the rather superfluous reference to "Brenda"? I've posted this
at least a half dozen times and made dozens of references both
to "Brenda" and to Reedy as "the Phantom"
and have never once heard one peek from Reedy about it.
(Much as I never hear from Rollett about what I have gleaned
from his work...which I know is significant.) Most bizarre!
If it was Reedy's joke (knowing that all good jokes, of course,
contain a core of truth) it is greatly appreciated.
Besides...it is always effective in shutting Tom up.
Art N.
Art Neuendorffer
>
> > > Show me ONE reputable author who uses "ENCOMIA"
"Peter Farey" <Peter...@prst17z1.demon.co.uk> wrote
>
> Wraight's competence as a literary historian was, in my
> opinion, very questionable, but never her competence in
> the use of correct English, for which she was a stickler.
-------------------------------------------------------------
Stickler, n. [See {Stickle}, v. t.] One who stickles. Specifically:
(a) One who arbitrates a duel; a sidesman to a fencer; a second; an umpire.
[Obs.]
"Basilius, the judge, appointed sticklers and trumpets whom the others
should obey." --Sir P. Sidney.
"Our former chiefs, like sticklers of the war, First sought to inflame the
parties, then to poise." --Dryden.
(b) One who pertinaciously contends for some trifling things, as a point of
etiquette; an unreasonable, obstinate contender; as, a stickler for
ceremony.
The Tory or High-church were the greatest sticklers against the exorbitant
proceedings of King James II. --Swift.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Stickle, v. i. [Probably fr. OE. stightlen, sti?tlen, to dispose, arrange,
govern, freq. of stihten, AS. stihtan: cf. G. stiften to found, to
establish.] 1. To separate combatants by intervening. [Obs.]
"When he [the angel] sees half of the Christians killed, and the rest in a
fair way of being routed, he stickles betwixt the remainder of God's host
and the race of fiends." --Dryden.
2. To contend, contest, or altercate, esp. in a pertinacious manner on
insufficient grounds.
Fortune, as she 's wont, turned fickle, And for the foe began to
stickle. --Hudibras.
While for paltry punk they roar and stickle. --Dryden.
The obstinacy with which he stickles for the wrong. --Hazlitt.
3. To play fast and loose; to pass from one side to the other; to trim.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Art Neuendorffer
David L. Webb
"Peter Farey" <Peter...@prst17z1.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> David L. Webb wrote:
> >
> > Then someone who was tempted to send in advance
> > payment for Wraight's _The Legend of Hiram_ must
> > be a demented moron -- right, Art?
> >
> >
> <http://groups-beta.google.com/group/humanities.lit.authors.shakespeare/msg/
> 8e4cf6de3d6fe15a?dmode=source>
> Whilst 'demented moron' is probably overstating it,
Not in Art's case. Art declares not only that all Marlovians are "by
definition" incompetent, but moreover that *anyone* who ever used the
plural "encomia" is incompetent! This would include not only Wraight,
but also a chaired professor at the University of Toronto and a member
of the American Academy of Arts and Science, not to mention towering
intellectual figures like Isaiah Berlin and Benjamin Jowett. In fact,
in view of Art's subsequent exhibition, the locution "demented moron"
seems, if anything, overly charitable.
> any
> payment at this stage would seem to be unwise, given
> that the book has yet to be published. I understand that
> some members of the Committee of the UK Marlowe
> Society are hoping to accomplish this eventually, but,
> as Tom Reedy said in another context, I wouldn't hold
> my breath.
Art writes:
"I was tempted last year to send in my £14.95 advance:
Paperback, UK Sterling, £14.95, ISBN 1 897763 07 7"
It's a pity he didn't do so.
David L. Webb
"Art Neuendorffer" <aneuendor...@comcast.net> wrote:
You were shipped the statue of George Mason by mistake, Art.
David L. Webb
"Art Neuendorffer" <aneuendor...@comcast.net>
(aneuendor...@comicass.nut) wrote:
> Are people selling there [sic] advanced orders?
Is English your native tongue, Art?
David L. Webb
"Art Neuendorffer" <aneuendor...@comcast.net>
(aneuendor...@comicass.nut) wrote:
Tom's.
> And what are we (much less bewildered newbies) to
> make of the rather superfluous reference to "Brenda"?
You really haven't figured that out, Art?! "Brenda Reedy" is an
anagram by "By Ed, rear end." You could scarcely ask for a more
unequivocal identification of Oxford as author than that!
> I've posted this
> at least a half dozen times and made dozens of references both
> to "Brenda" and to Reedy as "the Phantom"
> and have never once heard one peek from Reedy about it.
To have explained the joke would have spoiled the spectacle of you
making a paranoid ass of yourself, Art. But now that I've taken pity
upon you, you can rest easy.
> (Much as I never hear from Rollett about what I have gleaned
> from his work
You didn't? What a surprise. I heard back from Rollett, Art.
> ...which I know is significant.)
While your work is not significant, except as a source of merriment,
Rollett's silence probably is -- I don't generally respond to deluded
cranks, and I would be surprised if Rollett did. (Did you send Rollett
the photo of yourself importuning George Mason, Art?)
> Most bizarre!
Indeed.
> If it was Reedy's joke (knowing that all good jokes, of course,
> contain a core of truth) it is greatly appreciated.
> Besides...it is always effective in shutting Tom up.
Now if one could only find an effective means of shutting you up....
Art Neuendorffer
> > Well, it certainly appears to be a joke... tweaking, as it does,
> > Crowley, Kennedy & myself all in the same message...
> > make of the rather superfluous reference to "Brenda"?
> > I've posted this at least a half dozen times
> > and made dozens of references both
> > to "Brenda" and to Reedy as "the Phantom"
> > and have never once heard one peek from Reedy about it.
Does my deeds make the blacker!
A stony adVERsary, an inhuman wretch
uncapable of PITY, void and empty
From any dram of mercy.
That bear'st a cheek for blows, a head for wrongs;
Who hast not in thy brows an eye discerning
Thine honour from thy suffering; that not know'st
Fools do those villains PITY who are punish'd
Ere they have done their mischief. Where's thy DRUM?
While kites and buzzards prey at LIBERTY.
No beast so fierce but knows some touch of PITY.
Showing an outward PITY; yet you Pilates
Have here deliVER'd me to my sour cross,
And water cannot wash away your sin.
A serpent that will sting thee to the heART.
And all such false professors! would you have me--
If you have any justice, any PITY;
has no more PITY in him than a dog:
If EVER been where bells have knoll'd to church,
If EVER sat at any good man's feast,
If EVER from your eyelids wiped a tear
And know what 'Tis to PITY and be PITIed,
Act 3, Scene 5
As till that time I shall not PITY thee.
That VERy oft we PITY enemies.
Les Miserables: Have PITY on me now this once, Monsieur JaVERt
Walden: I did not PITY the fishes nor the worms
------------------------------------------------------------
> > (Much as I never hear from Rollett about what I have gleaned
> > from his work
> > ...which I know is significant.)
> as a source of merriment, Rollett's silence probably is
>-- I don't generally respond to deluded cranks,
To pluck this crawling serpent from my breast!
Ay me, for PITY!
You would not make me such an argument.
To walk where any honest man resort.
> > If it was Reedy's joke (knowing that all good jokes, of course,
> > contain a core of truth) it is greatly appreciated.
> > Besides...it is always effective in shutting Tom up.
Hear what I say, and then go home and lose me.
To what I shall unfold.
That he is mad, 'Tis TRUE: 'Tis TRUE 'Tis PITY;
And PITY 'Tis 'Tis TRUE: a foolish figure;
But farewell it, for I will use no ART.
PITY me then, dear friend, and I assure ye
Even that your PITY is enough to cure me.
---------------------------------------------------
she tore a strip from her own apron and tied up his jaw.
Art Neuendorffer
> > > >
> > > > Then someone who was tempted to send in advance
> > > > payment for Wraight's _The Legend of Hiram_ must
> > > > be a demented moron -- right, Art?
>
> > "Peter Farey" <Peter...@prst17z1.demon.co.uk> wrote
> >
> > > Whilst 'demented moron' is probably overstating it, any
> > > payment at this stage would seem to be unwise, given
> > > that the book has yet to be published. I understand that
> > > some members of the Committee of the UK Marlowe
> > > Society are hoping to accomplish this eventually, but,
> > > as Tom Reedy said in another context, I wouldn't hold
> > > my breath.
> "Art Neuendorffer" <aneuendor...@comcast.net>
> > Interesting that a number of used copies are supposedly for sale:
> >
> > http://www.fetchbook.info/search_A._D._Wraight/searchBy_Author.html
> >
> > Are people selling there [sic] advanced orders?
"David L. Webb" <david....@dartmouth.edu> wrote
> Is English your native tongue, Art?
Would you prefer:
Are people selling advanced orders there?
Geburtstagkind Art Neuendorffer
Art Neuendorffer
> Art wrote: "I don't know what you mean by "facts," Elizabeth,"
>
> I know you don't know what I mean by "facts."
>
> Fondly, Elizabeth
Vizzini: Now, a clever man would put the poison into his own goblet, because
he would know that only a great fool would reach for what he was given. I am
not a great fool, so I can clearly not choose the wine in front of you. But
you must have known I was not a great fool, you would have counted on it, so
I can clearly not choose the wine in front of me.
Vizzini: You only think I guessed wrong - that's what's so funny. I switched
glasses when your back was turned. Ha-ha, you fool. You fell victim to one
of the classic blunders, the most famous of which is "Never get involved in
a land war in Asia", but only slightly less well known is this: "Never go in
against a Sicilian, when *death* is on the line."
Fondly, Vizzini
David L. Webb
"Art Neuendorffer" <aneuendor...@comcast.net>
(aneuendor...@comicass.nut) wrote:
If Tom had intended the joke only for Bob, he would have e-mailed it.
Fortunately, Tom was generous enough that we all got a good laugh out of
it. Indeed, some complete cretin called ph...@erols.com posted the
following farcical followup:
"Hi Tom,
Waiting patiently here for the other shoe to drop.
Just tell us this is a joke & that there is no wife Brenda (or 14
year old son P.O.ed enough to actually post your private e-mail).
You're keeping an idiot in suspense here. :-)
Art"
<http://groups-beta.google.com/group/humanities.lit.authors.shakespeare/m
sg/d7e66528037a699b?dmode=source>
Evidently the idiot has remained in suspense far longer than any of
expected.
> (If to HLAS; then why did "Tom" immediately delete it?)
To keep a paranoid moron off-balance -- which I concede is like
bearing coals to Newcastle. Since the original post was widely quoted,
there would be scant reason to delete it otherwise. Besides you, only
Richard Kennedy is stupid enough to think that he can expunge all record
of his idiocies by deleting his posts from the archive. (If the Grand
Master had *really* wanted the post removed, I can assure you that there
would be no trace remaining of it.)
> > "Art Neuendorffer" <aneuendor...@comcast.net>
>
> > > And what are we (much less bewildered newbies) to
> > > make of the rather superfluous reference to "Brenda"?
> "David L. Webb" <david....@dartmouth.edu> wrote
>
> > You really haven't figured that out, Art?!
> > "Brenda Reedy" is an anagram by "By Ed, rear end."
> I'm telling Brenda you said that! :-)
> > "Art Neuendorffer" <aneuendor...@comcast.net>
>
> > > I've posted this at least a half dozen times
> > > and made dozens of references both
> > > to "Brenda" and to Reedy as "the Phantom"
> > > and have never once heard one peek from Reedy about it.
> "David L. Webb" <david....@dartmouth.edu> wrote
>
> > To have explained the joke would have spoiled the
> > spectacle of you making a paranoid ass of yourself, Art.
> >
> > But now that I've taken PITY upon you, you can rest easy.
[Lunatic logorrhea snipped]
> > "Art Neuendorffer" <aneuendor...@comcast.net>
>
> > > ...which I know is significant.)
> "David L. Webb" <david....@dartmouth.edu> wrote
>
> > While your work is not significant, except
> > as a source of merriment, Rollett's silence probably is
> >-- I don't generally respond to deluded cranks,
> But you respond to me, Dave. ERGO....
That's because, as I have said many times, Art, you are not the
demented anti-Stratfordian crank you pretend to be; rather, you are a
gifted parodist who burlesques unerringly the more lunatic-fringe
Oxfordians via your Clueless Cretin and Petulant Paranoid personae --
or, perhaps you prefer "personas" or "personopodes," Art.
[...]
David L. Webb
"Art Neuendorffer" <aneuendor...@comcast.net>
(aneuendor...@comicass.nut) wrote:
I think that you would prefer to have written "Are people selling
their advanced orders?" HoweVER, even your lame second alternative
would have been preferable to what you wrote, Art.
> Geburtstagkind Art Neuendorffer
Congratulations, Art -- but isn't the big day April 1?
Art Neuendorffer
> "Art Neuendorffer" <aneuendor...@comcast.net>
> > Tom's joke to Grumman...or to HLAS?
> > (If to HLAS; then why did "Tom" immediately delete it?)
"David L. Webb" <david....@dartmouth.edu> wrote
> To keep a paranoid moron off-balance -- which I concede is like
> bearing coals to Newcastle. Since the original post was widely quoted,
> there would be scant reason to delete it otherwise. Besides you, only
> Richard Kennedy is stupid enough to think that he can expunge all record
> of his idiocies by deleting his posts from the archive. (If the Grand
> Master had *really* wanted the post removed, I can assure you
> that there would be no trace remaining of it.)
Is Reedy's son the Grand Master?
> > > "Art Neuendorffer" <aneuendor...@comcast.net>
> >
> > > > I've posted this at least a half dozen times
> > > > and made dozens of references both
> > > > to "Brenda" and to Reedy as "the Phantom"
> > > > and have never once heard one peek from Reedy about it.
> > > > ...which I know is significant.)
>
> > "David L. Webb" <david....@dartmouth.edu> wrote
> >
> > > While your work is not significant, except
> > > as a source of merriment, Rollett's silence probably is
> > >-- I don't generally respond to deluded cranks,
> "Art Neuendorffer" <aneuendor...@comcast.net>
> > But you respond to me, Dave. ERGO....
"David L. Webb" <david....@dartmouth.edu> wrote
> That's because, as I have said many times, Art, you are not the
> demented anti-Stratfordian crank you pretend to be; rather, you are
> a gifted parodist who burlesques unerringly the more lunatic-fringe
> Oxfordians via your Clueless Cretin and Petulant Paranoid personae --
> or, perhaps you prefer "personas" or "personopodes," Art.
Why doesn't Greg like me then?
Art Neuendorffer
Peter Farey
Art Neuendorffer wrote:
>
> Peter Farey wrote:
> >
> > Whilst 'demented moron' is probably overstating it, any
> > payment at this stage would seem to be unwise, given
> > that the book has yet to be published. I understand that
> > some members of the Committee of the UK Marlowe
> > Society are hoping to accomplish this eventually, but,
> > as Tom Reedy said in another context, I wouldn't hold
> > my breath.
>
> Interesting that a number of used copies are supposedly
> for sale:
>
> http://www.fetchbook.info/search_A._D._Wraight/searchBy_Author.html
>
> Are people selling there advanced orders?
The book has certainly been advertised as being on sale
for ages. However, the Chairman's report for the forth-
coming AGM of the Marlowe Society tells us that various
"Committee members" have been "involved in an initiative
which we hope will eventually lead to the publication
of one of the two unpublished books by Dolly, *The
Legend of Hiram*".
I notice, by the way, that her other unpublished book,
*Christopher Marlowe and the Armada*, is also for sale
at the above website.
Also on sale, I see, is her *Shakespeare: New Evidence*,
(which *was* published) and is as good an example as you
could wish for of something being presented as the work
of a single author (as it is shown on the book itself),
when the most important bits of it were actually written
by someone else. Although the reason why the real author
of those bits preferred not to be named as such is not
the same (I'm pleased to say!), I do see *some* parallel
with the Shakespeare situation.
Paul Crowley
news:cupt6k$j15$1$8300...@news.demon.co.uk...
>
> Tom Reedy wrote:
> >
> > This is great stuff, but I wouldn't hold my breath
> > waiting for an acknowledgment, David.
> >
> > Art, along with the rest of the antiStratfordians,
> > cannot bear to contemplate the idea that they are
> > wrong and that they've been wasting their lives in
> > their "research." The rational response would be to
> > salvage what time they have left in more profitable
> > pursuits, but their particular form of mental
> > illness precludes them from that action. Instead,
> > they throw good after bad by engaging in ever more
> > "research" to justify their life's waste.
>
> And some of us try to engage in a civilized discussion
> concerning our theories.
That excludes you. I regularly ask
you simple direct questions about your
theories. I rarely (if ever) get a response.
> Unfortunately, there are too
> many around like you, Tom, who (for example) upon
> being asked over three weeks ago to explain why you
> had said that I had used "faulty reasoning" in my paper
> on the monument, just scuttled back into the woodwork,
> to resume your mindless abuse of anti-Stratfordians in
> general and Elizabeth in particular.
You are not entitled to accuse others of
scuttling away from questions, when
you do so much of it yourself.
Paul.
Chess One
>> opinion, very questionable, but never her competence in
>> the use of correct English, for which she was a stickler.
> -------------------------------------------------------------
> Stickler, n. [See {Stickle}, v. t.] One who stickles. Specifically:
>
> (a) One who arbitrates a duel; a sidesman to a fencer; a second; an
> umpire.
> [Obs.]
STICKLER: A person who presides at backsword or singlestick; to regulate the
game; an umpire; a person who settles disputes.
Come, niver mind the single-sticks,
Tha whoppin or tha stickler;
You dwon't want now a brawken head,
Nor jitchy zoort o' tickler!
/Ballad of Tom Gool.
> "Basilius, the judge, appointed sticklers and trumpets whom the others
> should obey." --Sir P. Sidney.
>
> "Our former chiefs, like sticklers of the war, First sought to inflame the
> parties, then to poise." --Dryden.
>
> (b) One who pertinaciously contends for some trifling things, as a point
> of
> etiquette; an unreasonable, obstinate contender; as, a stickler for
> ceremony.
>
> The Tory or High-church were the greatest sticklers against the exorbitant
> proceedings of King James II. --Swift.
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
> Stickle, v. i. [Probably fr. OE. stightlen, sti?tlen, to dispose, arrange,
> govern, freq. of stihten, AS. stihtan: cf. G. stiften to found, to
> establish.] 1. To separate combatants by intervening. [Obs.]
> 3. To play fast and loose; to pass from one side to the other; to trim.
STICKY-STACK was the name of a popular game
There is also the word STICHALL: [a term which in some places has the prefix
'bub-' attached to it, is used in an old play quoted by Nares, /Lady
Alimony/.
Of specifically Warwickshire use; STICK is a term or reproach as in "you are
a pretty stick" or a clergyman might be called "a good or bad stick".
Of course the most famous [Shak] usage is in STICKING-PLACE; where the
author intends 'fixed place', and which owes nothing to these words and
phrases above;
Which flower out of my hand shall never passe,
But in my harte shall have a sticking-place.
/Proctor's Gorgious Gallery, 1578
And is a reference to an older word as sourced. This is what the author has
used, the A. Sax stem STIE~.
[Incidentally, a STIKE is a verse or stanza, and also attains another
meaning in; to stick, or to pierce, and is recorded as STILILLICHE,
piercingly [A. Sax.] in Kyng Alisaunder, 219.
Phil Innes
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
> Art Neuendorffer
>
>
David L. Webb
"Art Neuendorffer" <aneuendor...@comcast.net>
(aneuendor...@comicass.nut) wrote:
[...]
> > Of course, I realize that you have no idea what a "book" is, Art,
> > that the closest approximation to reading of which you are capable is
> > grepping online, and that you are unlikely to have online access
> > to the OED, so for your benefit, I will suggest also the link
> >
> > <http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?search=encomium&searchmode=none>,
> >
> > where you will find the following etymology:
> >
> > "1589, from L.L. encomium, from Gk. enkomion (epos) 'laudatory (ode),
> > eulogy,' from en- 'in' + komos 'banquet, procession, merrymaking.'"
> >
> > I realize, of course, that you are utterly incapable of clicking the
> > link that explains the abbreviation "L.L.," so I will reproduce the
> > explanation for you, Art:
> >
> > "L.L. Late Latin, the literary Latin language
> > as spoken and written c.300-c.700."
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------
> Is 1589 c.300-c.700, Dave?
> (I'm confused about the math here.)
I know you are, Art; it must be prohibitively difficult for someone
with an I.Q. in the single digits to manipulate numbers with three or
more decimal digits. I will endeavor to remediate your confusion.
First, I feel certain that you have neVER heard of "Medieval Latin,"
and hence that you are blithely unaware that a language *spoken* around
700 remained in use for centuries thereafter as an important *written*
language. HoweVER, I might call to your attention the example of the
important Polish scientist Nicolaus Copernicus, with whom I VERy much
doubt that you are familiar. Copernicus wrote a VERy important, indeed
REVolutionary, scientific work around 1543, with which I am all but
certain that you are unfamiliar, entitled
"De revolutionibus orbium coelestium"
-- just what language do you suppose that is, Art -- Polish?
I really hate to confuse you further with numbers, Art, since your
spectacular exhibition in the case of the number nineteen REVealed quite
clearly how much difficulty you have even with two-digit numbers, but
completeness compels me to point out that the date of Copernicus's "De
revolutionibus orbium coelestium" -- 1543 -- does not fall within the
period 300-700. No doubt this fact will convince you that the work was
definitely written in Polish.
Second, I might call to your attention the existence of an
institution with which you are almost certainly unfamiliar, an
institution that wielded enormous influence throughout most of Europe
during the Renaissance. That institution is called the Vatican. Now,
in what tongue do you suppose that the Vatican communicated, Art --
Vatic, perhaps?
> > Moreover, should you eVER aspire to learn to read rather than grep, you
> > might take a look at other etymological dictionaries as well, Art. For
> > example, I have on my shelf Eric Partridge's short etymological English
> > dictionary Origins , in which one finds the following etymology:
>
> > "ENCOMIAstic, enCOMIum
> > The former derives from Gr enKOMIastikos , eulogistic, the adj of
> > enKOMIon , formed of en , in + KOMos , a revel
> > (f.a.e., COMEDY), and yielding L, whence E, enCOMIum ."
> > > Show me ONE reputable author who uses "ENCOMIA"
There are many, many reputable writers other than your favorites,
Fielding, Wordsworth, etc., Art. I gave you not one, but half a dozen,
among them chaired professors of Classics at elite institutions, a
member of the American Academy of Arts and Science, the distinguished
nineteenth-century scholar Benjamin Jowett, and even the celebrated
Isaiah Berlin. Jowett, of course, is not a twentieth-century literary
historian, _pace_ your idiotic pronouncement. Being an idiot must be
sad indeed, but being irremediably an idiot must be sadder still.
> > > Only incompetent literary historians have ever used "ENCOMIA"
[My list of dinstinguished scholars who have used "encomia" snipped]
> Show me ONE reputable author who uses "ENCOMIA"
I have already showed you at least a half dozen, Art -- but since
your I.Q. scarcely exceeds six, it will doubtless come as news to you
that in furnishing seven examples, I furnished one example _a fortiori_.
(Incidentally, Art, what language do you suppose that "a fortiori" is?
No doubt you will conclude that I am writing during the period 300-700.)
> > Incidentally, Art -- in view of your insistence that "enkomion" is a
> > Greek word, just what do you think that its Greek plural *should* be?
>
> ENCOMIUM is English, Dave. The plural is ENCOMIUMS
No, there are *two* correct English plurals, as the OED confirms.
You are illiterate, Art -- but of course that fact was well known long
before now.
[...]
> > Congratulations, Art -- you have demonstrated pretty conclusively
> > that an international airport would not suffice to get you into Lehigh.
> > You'd better up the ante and throw in a 36-hole golf course as well. In
> > fact, I'm beginning to wonder how you got into George Mason Elementary
> > School, Art -- did your uncle endow the library or something?
> It's a mystery.
Indeed it is. And in view of your recent display of intellectual
acumen, Art, I should add that if you still aspire to get into Lehigh,
you should definitely sweeten the deal still further -- you need to add
to the above a major resort hotel. Mind you, I am far from certain that
that will suffice, but you might at least get a foot in the door thereby.
lyra
"ALL Marlovians are...'incompetent'" (was: The encomia of Dolly Wraight
also
"ALL Marlovians are by definition "incompetent"
Kit Marlowe was as phoney as the Stratman."
that would have surprised his parents...
and anyone else who knew him! :)
Happy Birthday (belated) anyway!
>
> Geburtstagkind Art Neuendorffer
David L. Webb
"Art Neuendorffer" <aneuendor...@comcast.net>
(aneuendor...@comicass.nut) wrote:
[...]
> > > --------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > "David Kathman" <dj...@ix.netcom.com> wrote
> > >
> > > > I'm sure [Webb] is as thrilled as I am at such ENCOMIA (sic).
> > > --------------------------------------------------------------------
> "David L. Webb" <david....@dartmouth.edu> wrote
>
> > I've already corrected this error of yours on the other thread, Art.
> "ENKOMION" : It's GREEK NOT LATIN!!
No, Art; I've already showed you the etymology from the OED and two
other etymological dictionaries. You are simply illiterate. "Encomium"
entered English via Latin.
> Show me ONE reputable author who uses "ENCOMIA"
I already showed you half a dozen in another thread, Art; you are
simply illiterate.
[Lunatic logorrhea snipped]
> > > > > David McCullough: "The strange, difficult, contradictory man
> > > > > who emerges as the real Shakespeare, Edward de Vere,
> > > > > the 17th Earl of Oxford, is not just plausible
> > > > > but fascinating and wholly believable.
> > > > > It is hard to imagine anyone who reads
> > > > > the book with an open mind ever seeing Shakespeare
> > > > > or his works in the same way again"
> > > > > (From the Foreword to the second edition of
> > > > > The Mysterious William Shakespeare by Charlton Ogburn)
> > > > Mark Alexander <mark a...@earthlink.net> wrote:
> > >
> > > > > [McCullough's] Oxfordian position
> > > > > seems not to have damaged his credibility.
> > > David Webb:
> > >
> > > > McCullough's well-deserved success, while a cause for
> > > > jubilant celebration among those who admire his work in his area of
> > > > professional expertise, is irrelevant to the question of who wrote the
> > > > works of Shakespeare; I doubt that any reasonable person would view
> > > > McCullough's success as "bad news," whatever his or her opinion
> > > > concerning Shakespeare authorship might be.
> > > And what EXACTLY is DNB contributor
> > > David Kathman's area of professional expertise??
> "David L. Webb" <david....@dartmouth.edu> wrote
>
> > As you would know if you were paying attention, Art,
> > Dave's Ph.D. is in linguistics.
> Rather sad, isn't it for him to use "ENCOMIA"
No. What is sad is to see an illiterate moron making an ass of
himself because he cannot read the OED -- or other dictionaries and
etymological dictionaries either, for that matter.
> David L. Webb" <david....@dartmouth.edu> wrote
> > HoweVER, for quite some time his work has been in the
> > history of the Elizabethan theatre, and he has been quite successful --
> > his work appears in major peer-reviewed publications, and as you noted
> > above, he has even contributed to the DNB. His credentials as literary
> > historian of the period in question are irrepROACHable.
Incidentally, Art, how many peer-REViewed publications do you have in
major journals coVERing Elizabethan and Jacobean theatre history? J.
Math. Anal. Appl. doesn't exactly fit the bill, you know.
> irrepROACHable: free of guilt.
>
> (Yes, I sincerely doubt that Kathman knows the meaning of guilt.)
> "David L. Webb" <david....@dartmouth.edu> wrote
>
> > By the way, Art, what EXACTLY is the area of professional expertise
> > of aneuendor...@comicass.nut?
> I'm currently studying the influence of meteoric atmospherium on
> the earth's ozone layer; I expect it to contribute much to science.
Your inability to distinguish fact from fiction must surely go a long
way toward explaining your cognitive dysfunction, Art.
> <<It's 1961 and Dr. Paul Armstrong and his lovely wife Betty head into the
> mountains in search of a recently fallen meteor containing the rare element
> atmospherium. Paul hopes it contains atmospherium, a rare element that will
> contribute much to science. Also in the area, sinister Dr. Roger Fleming
> asks trusty Ranger Brad the whereabouts of Cadavra Cave, mysterious home
> to rumors of a legend of the Lost Skeleton." That night, both parties witness
> what appears to be yet another meteor falling. Immediately after, a local
> farmer is killed by a horrible, unseen thing. Is there a connection? Indeed
> there is. The second meteor is actually a disabled alien spaceship with a
> strange couple from the planet Marva: Krobar and Lattis. These aliens
> discover they also need atmospherium to power their really high tech ship,
> and notice their horrible pet mutant, which they travel around with for some
> reason, has escaped. Unfortunately, Dr. Fleming discovers he also needs
> the atmospherium to bring to life the dreaded Lost Skeleton of Cadavra
> which he finds in the cave.>>
>
> http://www.haro-online.com/movies/lost skeleton cadavra.html
> http://www.haro-online.com/movies/lost skeleton cadavra.html
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
Art Neuendorffer
> > > Of course, I realize that you have no idea what a "book" is, Art,
> > > that the closest approximation to reading of which you are capable is
> > > grepping online, and that you are unlikely to have online access
> > > to the OED, so for your benefit, I will suggest also the link
> > >
> > > <http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?search=encomium&searchmode=none>,
> > >
> > > where you will find the following etymology:
> > >
> > > "1589, from L.L. encomium, from Gk. enkomion (epos) 'laudatory (ode),
> > > eulogy,' from en- 'in' + komos 'banquet, procession, merrymaking.'"
> > >
> > > I realize, of course, that you are utterly incapable of clicking the
> > > link that explains the abbreviation "L.L.," so I will reproduce the
> > > explanation for you, Art:
> > >
> > > "L.L. Late Latin, the literary Latin language
> > > as spoken and written c.300-c.700."
> "Art Neuendorffer" <aneuendor...@comcast.net>
> > Is 1589 c.300-c.700, Dave?
> > (I'm confused about the math here.)
"David L. Webb" <david....@dartmouth.edu> wrote
> I know you are, Art; it must be prohibitively difficult for someone
> with an I.Q. in the single digits to manipulate numbers with three or
> more decimal digits. I will endeavor to remediate your confusion.
>
> First, I feel certain that you have neVER heard of "Medieval Latin,"
> and hence that you are blithely unaware that a language *spoken* around
> 700 remained in use for centuries thereafter as an important *written*
> language. HoweVER, I might call to your attention the example of the
> important Polish scientist Nicolaus Copernicus, with whom I VERy much
> doubt that you are familiar. Copernicus wrote a VERy important, indeed
> REVolutionary, scientific work around 1543, with which I am all but
> certain that you are unfamiliar, entitled
>
> "De revolutionibus orbium coelestium"
>
> -- just what language do you suppose that is, Art -- Polish?
>
> I really hate to confuse you further with numbers, Art, since your
> spectacular exhibition in the case of the number nineteen REVealed quite
> clearly how much difficulty you have even with two-digit numbers, but
> completeness compels me to point out that the date of Copernicus's
> "De revolutionibus orbium coelestium" -- 1543 -- does not fall
> within the period 300-700. No doubt this fact will convince
> you that the work was definitely written in Polish.
------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.mcgoodwin.net/pages/otherbooks/ds_galileodaughter.html
<<A comet appeared 1618, the first seen with a telescope, and two more
larger later in the year. Tycho had suggested that comets disproved the
existence of the crystalline spheres, which they would have to crash
through--he also observed a nova in 1572. GG thought comets were
anomalous illuminations of the air, but the Jesuit Father ORAZIO GRASSI
argued that they were positioned between the sun and the moon. GG's
student Mario Guiducci wrote on comets & offended Father Grassi, who
felt he had been singled out for attack and published his own rebuttals.
In retaliation, GG wrote "Il Saggiatore" (the Assayer), further
offending Grassi. In 1620, the Index announced the necessary corrections
that must be made to "De revolutionibus" so that it could be removed
from the Index of Prohibited Books. "The Assayer" thus avoided
specifically Copernican doctrine but defended GG's philosophy of science
emphasizing the experimental method. [He used the word "cimento"
or ordeal for experiment. His work implied an understanding of
what came later to be called Newton's laws of motion.]>>
------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.catholic.com/library/Galileo_Controversy.asp
<<At GALILEO's request, Cardinal Robert Bellarmine, a Jesuit-one of the
most important Catholic theologians of the day-issued a certificate that
forbade GALILEO to hold or defend the heliocentric theory. When GALILEO
met with the new pope, Urban VIII, in 1623, he received permission
from his longtime friend to write a work on heliocentrism, but the new
pontiff cautioned him not to advocate the new position, only to present
arguments for and against it. When GALILEO wrote the Dialogue on the
Two World Systems, he used an argument the pope had offered,
and placed it in the mouth of his character Simplicio.
GALILEO, perhaps inadvertently, made fun of the pope,
a result that could only have disastrous consequences.
Urban felt mocked and could not believe how his friend could
disgrace him publicly. GALILEO had mocked the very person he
needed as a benefactor. He also alienated his long-time supporters,
the Jesuits, with attacks on one of their astronomers.
The result was the infamous trial, which is still heralded
as the final separation of science & religion.>>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
http://userzweb.lightspeed.net/dosvader/Galileo.htm
<<On February 26, 1616, Cardinal Bellarmine granted an audience
to GALILEO warning him that he must neither "hold nor defend"
[Copernicus]. For the next seven years GALILEO led a life of
studious retirement in his house in Bellosguardo near Florence.
At the end of that time (1623), he replied to a pamphlet by
ORAZIO GRASSI about the nature of comets aimed at GALILEO.
His reply, titled Saggiatore ("Assayer . . . "), was a brilliant polemic
on physical reality dedicated to Urban VIII, who as
MAFFEO BARBERINI had been a longtime friend & protector
of GALILEO. Pope Urban received the dedication enthusiastically.>>
<<Urbain VIII, who will vainly try to protect GALILEO from the
lightnings of the Enquiry, will exile ORAZIO GRASSI, astronomer of the
Romain College and the accusing main thing, and will name his own nephew
chair court which is constituted. The pontiff will authorize GALILEO
to publish his "It Saggiatore" (the Tester) in which it will counteract
the thesis of the Jesuit ORAZIO GRASSI on the nature of comets.>>
--------------------------------------------------------------------
<<On August 6, 1623, MAFFEO BARBERINI is elected Pope Urban VIII
He declared INIGO Y-ONAZ, (IGNAtius Loyola) to be a saint.>>
-------------------------------------------------------------------
On August 6, 1623, Anne Hathaway dies in Stratford
following a rare OCCULTATION of Uranus by Jupiter.
http://www.ctv.es/USERS/aramirez/cielos/remoto/occplan.html
Greg. date/time
1623/08/15 16.51 0°00'04"99 JUP - URA 15.58" 1.81" 9W
[Surely someone must have seen these two planets
close together with one of the new telescopes!
Uranus is practically visible to the naked eye.]
---------------------------------------------------------------
On the 14th anniversary of Anne Hathaway's death [August 6, 1637]
Ben Jonson was BURIED UPRIGHT against the wall of his crypt.
'Two feet by two feet will do for all I want'. - Jonson
----------------------------------------------------------------------
"David L. Webb" <david....@dartmouth.edu> wrote
> Second, I might call to your attention the existence of an
> institution with which you are almost certainly unfamiliar, an
> institution that wielded enormous influence throughout most of Europe
> during the Renaissance. That institution is called the Vatican. Now,
> in what tongue do you suppose that the Vatican communicated, Art --
> Vatic, perhaps?
Darth Vatic, perhaps.
Vatic adj : resembling or characteristic of a prophet or prophecy; "the high
priest's divinatory pronouncement"; "mantic powers"; "a kind of sibylline
book with ready and infallible answers to questions"
> > "David L. Webb" <david....@dartmouth.edu> wrote
> > > I have on my shelf Eric Partridge's short etymological English
> > > dictionary Origins , in which one finds the following etymology:
> > > "ENCOMIAstic, enCOMIum
> > > The former derives from Gr enKOMIastikos , eulogistic, the adj of
> > > enKOMIon , formed of en , in + KOMos , a revel
> > > (f.a.e., COMEDY), and yielding L, whence E, enCOMIum ."
> "Art Neuendorffer" <aneuendor...@comcast.net>
> > Show me ONE reputable author who uses "ENCOMIA"
"David L. Webb" <david....@dartmouth.edu> wrote
> There are many, many reputable writers other than your favorites,
> Fielding, Wordsworth, etc., Art. I gave you not one, but half a dozen,
> among them chaired professors of Classics at elite institutions, a
> member of the American Academy of Arts and Science, the distinguished
> nineteenth-century scholar Benjamin Jowett,
Yawn!
"David L. Webb" <david....@dartmouth.edu> wrote
> and even the celebrated Isaiah Berlin.
Johnnie, get your gun,
Get your gun, get your gun,
Take it on the run,
On the run, on the run.
Hear them calling, you and me,
Every son of LIBERTY.
Hurry right away,
No delay, no delay,
Make your daddy glad
To have had such a lad.
Tell your sweetheart not pine,
To be proud her boy's in line.
O-VER there, O-VER there,
Send the word, send the word O-VER there -
That the Yanks are coming,
The Yanks are coming,
The drums rum-tumming
Ev'rywhere.
So prepare, say a pray'r,
Send the word, send the word to beware.
We'll be O-VER, we're coming O-VER,
And we won't come back till it's O-VER
O-VER there.
"David L. Webb" <david....@dartmouth.edu> wrote
> Jowett, of course, is not a twentieth-century literary
> historian, _pace_ your idiotic pronouncement.
Well, he almost made it to the 20th century.
> "Art Neuendorffer" <aneuendor...@comcast.net>
> > Show me ONE reputable author who uses "ENCOMIA"
"David L. Webb" <david....@dartmouth.edu> wrote
> I have already showed you at least a half dozen, Art -
I said ONE "reputable" author.
"David L. Webb" <david....@dartmouth.edu> wrote
> I furnished one example _a fortiori_.
> (Incidentally, Art, what language do you suppose that "a fortiori" is?
Italian?
> > "David L. Webb" <david....@dartmouth.edu> wrote
> > > Incidentally, Art -- in view of your insistence that "enkomion" is
a
> > > Greek word, just what do you think that its Greek plural *should* be?
> "Art Neuendorffer" <aneuendor...@comcast.net>
> > ENCOMIUM is English, Dave. The plural is ENCOMIUMS
"David L. Webb" <david....@dartmouth.edu> wrote
> No, there are *two* correct English plurals, as the OED confirms.
Then how come all the famous good writers use ENCOMIUMS;
while all the literary historical hacks use ENCOMIA?
Art Neuendorffer
Art Neuendorffer
>> "ALL Marlovians are by definition "incompetent"
>> Kit Marlowe was as phoney as the Stratman."
"lyra" <mountai...@RockAthens.com> wrote
> that would have surprised his parents...
> and anyone else who knew him! :)
Do you know anyone who knew him?
"lyra" <mountai...@RockAthens.com> wrote
> Happy Birthday (belated) anyway!
Thanks, Lyra.
Art Neuendorffer
> Incidentally, Art, how many peer-REViewed publications do you have
> in major journals coVERing Elizabethan and Jacobean theatre history?
That's a trick question, Dave, I have no peer
in the field of Elizabethan and Jacobean theatre history.
Art Neuendorffer
David L. Webb
"Art Neuendorffer" <aneuendor...@comcast.net>
(aneuendor...@comicass.nut) wrote:
[...]
> > Of course, I realize that you have no idea what a "book" is, Art,
> > that the closest approximation to reading of which you are capable is
> > grepping online, and that you are unlikely to have online access
> > to the OED, so for your benefit, I will suggest also the link
> >
> > <http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?search=encomium&searchmode=none>,
> >
> > where you will find the following etymology:
> >
> > "1589, from L.L. encomium, from Gk. enkomion (epos) 'laudatory (ode),
> > eulogy,' from en- 'in' + komos 'banquet, procession, merrymaking.'"
> >
> > I realize, of course, that you are utterly incapable of clicking the
> > link that explains the abbreviation "L.L.," so I will reproduce the
> > explanation for you, Art:
> >
> > "L.L. Late Latin, the literary Latin language
> > as spoken and written c.300-c.700."
> Is 1589 c.300-c.700, Dave?
> (I'm confused about the math here.)
I know you are, Art; I realize that you have serious difficulties
with mathematics -- indeed, your demented disquisition on the number
nineteen demonstrated quite clearly just how serious your confusions
are. I have already attempted to remediate your confusion elsewhere,
but since you rarely grasp any point the first time (or the second time,
or the third time, etc.), I shall elaborate a little further for your
edification.
I already noted that you are blithely unaware that Latin was used
well into the Renaissance and Reformation period. I also called to your
attention a 1543 scientific work by the celebrated Polish scientist
Nicolaus Copernicus, entitled
"De revolutionibus orbium coelestium"
-- which you no doubt concluded was written in Polish, because 1543 does
not fall between 300 and 700.
Let me point out to you some other works with which I VERy much doubt
that you are familiar, works which might well interest you given your
professed interest in planetary science. One is a 1588 work by Danish
astronomer Tycho Brahe, entitled
"De mundi aetherei recentioribus phaenomenis."
Since 1588 does not fall between 300 and 700, you will no doubt be quite
perplexed about the language in which this title is written, Art. Just
what language do you think it is, Art -- Danish? If so, it looks
strikingly similar in many respects to the Polish of Copernicus.
When Brahe began his study of astronomy, he read a work by the German
mathematician Johann Müller Regiomontanus entitled
"De triangulis omnimodis";
-- just what language do you think this is, Art? Since the work was
published in 1464, and since 1464 does not fall between 300 and 700, a
moron who has as much trouble with mathematics as you do will no doubt
infer that it must be German, and will be struck by the similarities
with the Polish of Copernicus and the Danish of Brahe.
For that matter, the great English scientist Isaac Newton (1643-1727)
published a number of influential scientific works, among them
"De Methodis Serierum et Fluxionum,"
and in 1687 the greatest scientific book eVER written,
"Philosophiae naturalis principia mathematica"
-- just what language do think that this is, Art? Since 1687 does not
fall between 300 and 700, and since your native tongue is not English,
Art, you will no doubt surmise that it must be English.
Kakoi kretin!
[...]
David L. Webb
"Art Neuendorffer" <aneuendor...@comcast.net>
(aneuendor...@comicass.nut) wrote:
That's true, Art -- I know of nobody else who thinks that Virgil
predated Herodotus, that Anne Hathaway was Shakespeare's mother, that
Aleksandr Nevskii was "tsar," that "moniment" meant "laughingstock" in
the early 1600s, that Latin ceased being used by 700, that "encomia" is
not a correct plural of "encomium," that the number nineteen is
remarkable in that it is both the sum of two consecutive integers and
the difference of their squares, etc.
In fact, it would take an ignorant idiot even to reach the *one*
conlusion about the word "moniment" -- and indeed both Richard Kennedy
and "Dr." Faker arrived at the same conclusion independently -- but even
Kennedy and Faker can tell the emeritus Yale historian Peter Gay from a
Raytheon plant manager a quarter century younger! You are certainly --
or better, cretinly -- without peer, Art!
Fryzer
> Bob Grumman wrote:
>
>>Tom Reedy wrote:
>>
>>>Art, along with the rest of the antiStratfordians,
>>>cannot bear to contemplate the idea that they are
>>>wrong and that they've been wasting their lives in
>>>their "research." The rational response would be to
>>>salvage what time they have left in more profitable
>>>pursuits, but their particular form of mental
>>>illness precludes them from that action. Instead,
>>>they throw good after bad by engaging in ever more
>>>"research" to justify their life's waste.
>
>
>>of cerebral dysfunctionality for psychologists and
>>other students of irrationality.
>
>
> Bob, what excellent timing! A perfect example of yet
> another who dives for cover as soon as the questions
> get too difficult.
I hope, mr farey, that you do not presume to include me in these
thoughts. Time permitting, i would never excuse myself from any debate-
unfortunately i am excessively busy at the moment and have no time for
HLAS flights of fantasy- i have not, however, forgotten your request for
a critique and, supposing you still desire it, shall deliver it unto you
at the first moment i have at hand.
frizer
David L. Webb
"Art Neuendorffer" <aneuendor...@comcast.net>
(aneuendor...@comicass.nut) wrote:
[Irrelevant nonsense snipped]
ANSWER THE QUESTION, Art:
just what language do you think "De revolutionibus orbium coelestium" is
-- Polish?
And what do you make of the date, 1543, Art? It does not fall between
300 and 700. Let's find out just how much of an idiot you really are.
You seem quite determined to prove that the appelation "clueless cretin"
is oVERly generous.
> "David L. Webb" <david....@dartmouth.edu> wrote
>
> > Second, I might call to your attention the existence of an
> > institution with which you are almost certainly unfamiliar, an
> > institution that wielded enormous influence throughout most of Europe
> > during the Renaissance. That institution is called the Vatican. Now,
> > in what tongue do you suppose that the Vatican communicated, Art --
> > Vatic, perhaps?
> Darth Vatic, perhaps.
ANSWER THE QUESTION, Art -- in what tongue do you think that the
Vatican communicated?
[...]
> "David L. Webb" <david....@dartmouth.edu> wrote
>
> > > > I have on my shelf Eric Partridge's short etymological English
> > > > dictionary Origins, in which one finds the following etymology:
>
> > > > "ENCOMIAstic, enCOMIum
> > > > The former derives from Gr enKOMIastikos, eulogistic, the adj of
> > > > enKOMIon, formed of en, in + KOMos, a revel
> > > > (f.a.e., COMEDY), and yielding L, whence E, enCOMIum."
> > "Art Neuendorffer" <aneuendor...@comcast.net>
>
> > > Show me ONE reputable author who uses "ENCOMIA"
> "David L. Webb" <david....@dartmouth.edu> wrote
>
> > There are many, many reputable writers other than your favorites,
> > Fielding, Wordsworth, etc., Art. I gave you not one, but half a dozen,
> > among them chaired professors of Classics at elite institutions, a
> > member of the American Academy of Arts and Science, the distinguished
> > nineteenth-century scholar Benjamin Jowett,
> Yawn!
My apologies, Art -- I should have realized that even one example
would have oVERtaxed your attention span, so half a dozen literally put
you to sleep. Perhaps you should look into medications that can be VERy
effective in treating attention deficit disorder.
> "David L. Webb" <david....@dartmouth.edu> wrote
>
> > and even the celebrated Isaiah Berlin.
[Lunatic logorrhea snipped]
> "David L. Webb" <david....@dartmouth.edu> wrote
>
> > Jowett, of course, is not a twentieth-century literary
> > historian, _pace_ your idiotic pronouncement.
> Well, he almost made it to the 20th century.
> > "Art Neuendorffer" <aneuendor...@comcast.net>
>
> > > Show me ONE reputable author who uses "ENCOMIA"
> "David L. Webb" <david....@dartmouth.edu> wrote
>
> > I have already showed you at least a half dozen, Art -
> I said ONE "reputable" author.
The first of the half-dozen examples I furnished is ONE reputable
author, Art; howeVER, in view of your self-professed mathematical
difficulties, I can readily appreciate that you don't understand that in
furnishing six examples, I have furnished one example.
Hint: 6 = 1 + 1 + 1 + 1 + 1 + 1, Art. If you can get someone to explain
this to you, then you will be well on the way to understanding.
> "David L. Webb" <david....@dartmouth.edu> wrote
>
> > I furnished one example _a fortiori_.
> > (Incidentally, Art, what language do you suppose that "a fortiori" is?
> Italian?
No, Art; get someone to read the pertinent OED entry to you.
> > > "David L. Webb" <david....@dartmouth.edu> wrote
>
> > > > Incidentally, Art -- in view of your insistence that "enkomion" is
> a
> > > > Greek word, just what do you think that its Greek plural *should* be?
> > "Art Neuendorffer" <aneuendor...@comcast.net>
>
> > > ENCOMIUM is English, Dave. The plural is ENCOMIUMS
> "David L. Webb" <david....@dartmouth.edu> wrote
>
> > No, there are *two* correct English plurals, as the OED confirms.
> Then how come all the famous good writers use ENCOMIUMS;
> while all the literary historical hacks use ENCOMIA?
If you are unaware that Isaiah Berlin is a famous good writer, Art,
then you are a moron indeed. Here is an example from Samuel Taylor
Coleridge, Art:
"The characters of the deceased, like the encomia on tombstones, as
they are described with religious tenderness, so are they read, with
allowing sympathy indeed, but yet with rational deduction."
I realize of course that you have neVER even heard of, let alone read,
Coleridge, Art. HoweVER, he was not a twentieth-century literary
historian, _pace_ your idiotic claim to the contrary -- although trying
to explain Coleridge's dates to a moron who thinks that Virgil predated
Herodotus is a Sisyphean task.
Here is the American Heritage Dictionary's entry, Art:
"NOUN:
Inflected forms: pl. en·co·mi·ums or en·co·mi·a (-me~-[schwa])
1. Warm, glowing praise. 2. A formal expression of praise; a tribute.
ETYMOLOGY:
Latin enco~mium, from Greek enko~mion (epos), (speech) praising a
victor, neuter of enko~mios , of the victory procession, from
enko~mios, of the victory procession: en- , in; see en 2+ko~mos,
celebration."
Here is the entry from _The Columbia Guide to Standard American
English_, Art:
"encomium (n.)
means 'high and glowing praise, formally expressed.' Two plurals are
Standard: encomiums and encomia. See FOREIGN PLURALS."
Incidentally, Art, the discussion of foreign plurals is instructive:
"English has borrowed words from nearly every language with which it
has come into contact, and particularly for nouns from Latin, Greek,
Hebrew, and French, it has often borrowed their foreign plurals as
well. But when loan words cease to seem 'foreign,' and if their
frequency of use in English increases, they very often drop the
foreign plural in favor of a regular English -s. Thus at any given
time we can find some loan words in divided usage, with both the
foreign plural (e.g., _indices_) and the regular English plural
(e.g., _indexes_) in Standard use. And occasionally weąll find a
semantic distinction between the two acceptable forms, as with the
awe-inspiring Hebrew _cherubim_ and the chubby English _cherubs_.
Following are examples of some common loan words, together with the
plurals‹foreign, regular English, divided, or some other
combination‹now in current American English use; nearly all the forms
listed below are Standard.
[...]
from Latin
AGENDUM, agenda
agendums, agenda, agendas
ALUMNA (fem.)
alumnae (fem.) (uh-LUM-nee, uh-LUHM-nee)
ALUMNUS (masc.)
alumni (masc.) ( uh-LUM-nei, uh-LUHM-nei )
crisis
crises (KREI-seez)
curriculum
curriculums, curricula
DATA, datum
data
index
indexes, indices (IN-duh-seez)
from Greek
CRITERION
criteria, criterions
KUDOS, kudo
kudos (KOO-doz)
stigma
stigmata, stigmas
from Hebrew
CHERUB
cherubs, cherubim, cherubims
seraph
seraphs, seraphim
from French
bureau
bureaus, bureaux
chateau
chateaus, chateaux
sou
sous (SOOZ), sous (SOO)
from Italian
GRAFFITO, graffiti
graffiti, graffitis
concerto
concertos, concerti
soprano
sopranos, soprani
Confusion over the pronunciations and spellings of the plurals have
made the Conversational or Informal clipping _alum_ (plural _alums_),
with the stress on the second syllable, a very high-frequency word in
all but the highest levels and even in Semiformal writing. The
masculine _alumni_ is most frequently used as the generic plural of
the full word when the referent is a mixed group: _The state
universityąs alumni council meets at Homecoming_.
2
Words borrowed from the scholarly classical languages have tended to
keep their foreign plural forms in English longer than have most
other foreign borrowings, both because many of their users have
studied the original languages,
[Of course, that excludes you, Art -- you evidently have not even
studied English.]
and because in scientific and other technical vocabularies there is
more compulsion to 'get it right' and so 'preserve the tradition'
than there is in the general lexicon."
[...]"
Simply put, Art, you cannot read, and one can scarcely imagine a more
conclusive demonstration of that incapacity than you have so obligingly
provided here.
I realize that English is not your native tongue, Art (what *is* your
native tongue anyway, Art -- COBOL?), but it is both rash and ridiculous
for someone who is not a native speaker of English and who moreoVER has
not even read enough English to have the remotest idea what constitutes
standard English to try to correct the English of a trained linguist and
literary historian like Dave Kathman -- or for that matter, of a poet
like Samuel Taylor Coleridge.
lar...@yahoo.com
seems to be very thorough with footnotes, citing many primary sources.
She's also an engaging writer. I do wish, however, that she would have
offered her ideas as theory and interpretation instead of as fact.
Perhaps she wanted to appear strong or supportive of her cause.
C.
Art Neuendorffer
> I realize that English is not your native tongue, Art
> (what *is* your native tongue anyway, Art -- COBOL?),
I only learned it so that I could read Lynne's USS Hopper button.
(I've discovered that Lynne has some sort of fetish for buttons
but she doesn't quite reach my pupik.)
FW 414: fable one, *FEEBLE* too.
Let us here consider the caSUS,
my dear little COUSIS
of the Ondt and the GraceHOPEr.
"David L. Webb" <david....@dartmouth.edu> wrote
> 6 = 1 + 1 + 1 + 1 + 1 + 1, Art.
Very good, Dave. Now, what's one and one and one and one
and one and one and one and one and one and one?
> > "David L. Webb" <david....@dartmouth.edu> wrote
> > > (Incidentally, Art, what language do you suppose that "a fortiori" is?
> "Art Neuendorffer" <aneuendor...@comcast.net>
> > Italian?
"David L. Webb" <david....@dartmouth.edu> wrote
> No, Art;
Well, what's the Italian then?
> > > "Art Neuendorffer" <aneuendor...@comcast.net>
> >
> > > > ENCOMIUM is English, Dave. The plural is ENCOMIUMS
>
> > "David L. Webb" <david....@dartmouth.edu> wrote
> >
> > > No, there are *two* correct English plurals, as the OED confirms.
> "Art Neuendorffer" <aneuendor...@comcast.net>
> > Then how come all the famous good writers use ENCOMIUMS;
> > while all the literary historical hacks use ENCOMIA?
"David L. Webb" <david....@dartmouth.edu> wrote
> If you are unaware that Isaiah Berlin is a famous
> good writer, Art, then you are a moron indeed.
And I thought I was a Neufrino.
"David L. Webb" <david....@dartmouth.edu> wrote
> Here is an example from Samuel Taylor Coleridge, Art:
>
> "The characters of the deceased, like the encomia on tombstones, as
> they are described with religious tenderness, so are they read, with
> allowing sympathy indeed, but yet with rational deduction."
Obviously Sammy was on opium at the time (; does Kathman use opium?)
(Besides, Masons are always screwing around with what they
put on tombstones & monuments; ...it's some sort of cipher.)
"David L. Webb" <david....@dartmouth.edu> wrote
> I realize of course that you have neVER even heard of,
> let alone read, Coleridge, Art.
Sure I have!
Didn't he write "The Horn Blows at Midnight"?
And didn't Wordsworth refer to him as "The Idiot Boy"?
-----------------------------------------------------------------
<<In July, 1797, the Wordsworths moved to Alfoxden, an old mansion that
was but a short walk from [Coleridge's] Stowey. Their express purpose
was to be closer to the Coleridges. With one incredible leap [Coleridge]
became a major poet. Almost *all* of [Coleridge's] finest poems were
written before the middle of the following year.>>
"We began the [Ancient Mariner] composition TOGETHER on that
memorable evening. I furnished two or three lines at the beginning,
e.g., "And listened like a three years' child: The Mariner had his will."
As we proceeded CONJOINTLY. . ." -- William Wordsworth.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
SAMUEL TAYLOR COLERIDGE 1911 Encyclopedium:
-----------------------------------------------------------------
<<COLERIDGE, SAMUEL TAYLOR (1772-1834), English poet and philosopher, was
born on the 21st of October 1772, at his fathers vicarage of Ottery St
Marys, Devonshire. His father, the Rev. John Coleridge (1719-1781), was a
man of some mark. He was known for his great scholarship, simplicity of
character, and affectionate interest in the pupils of the grammar school, of
which he was appointed master a few months before becoming vicar of the
parish (1760), reigning in both capacities till his death. He had married
twice. The poet was the youngest child of his second wife, Anne Bowdon (d.
1809), a woman of great good sense, and anxiously ambitious for the success
of her sons. On the death of his father, a presentation to Christs Hospital
was procured for Coleridge by the judge, Sir Francis Buller, an old pupil of
his fathers. He had already begun to give evidence of a powerful
imagination, and he has described in a letter to his valued friend, Tom
Poole, the pernicious effect which the admiration of an uncle and his circle
of friends had upon him at this period. For eight years he continued at
Christs Hospital. Of these school-days Charles Lamb has given delightful
glimpses in the Essays of Elia. The headmaster, Bowyer (as he was called,
though his name was Boyer), was a severe disciplinarian, but respected by
his pupils. Middleton, afterwards known as a Greek scholar, and bishop of
Calcutta, reported Coleridge to Bowyer as a boy who read Virgil for
amusement, and from that time Bowyer began to notice him and encouraged his
reading. Some compositions in English poetry, written at sixteen, and not
without a touch of genius, give evidence of the influence which Bowles,
whose poems were then in vogue, had over his mind at this time. Before he
left school his constitutional delicacy of frame, increased by swimming the
New River in his clothes, began to give him serious discomfort.
In February 1791 he was entered at Jesus College, Cambridge. A school-fellow
who followed him to the university has described in glowing terms evenings
in his rooms, when Aeschylus, and Plato, and Thucydides were pushed aside,
with a pile of lexicons and the like, to discuss the pamphlets of the day.
Ever and anon a pamphlet issued from the pen of Burke. There was no need of
having the book before us;Coleridge had read it in the morning, and in the
evening he would repeat whole pages verbatim. William Frend, a fellow of
Jesus, accused of sedition and IJnitarianism, was at this time tried and
expelled from Cambridge. Coleridge had imbibed his sentiments, and joined
the ranks of his partisans. He grew discontented with university life, and
in 1793, pressed by debt, went to London. Perhaps he was also influenced by
his passion for Mary Evans, the sister of one of his school-fellows. A poem
in the Morning Chronicle brought him a guinea, and when that was spent he
enlisted in the 15th Dragoons under the name of Silas Tomkyn Comberbache.
One of the officers of the dragoon regiment, finding a Latin sentence
inscribed on a wall, discovered the condition of the very awkward recruit.
Shortly afterwards an old schoolfellow (G. L. Tuckett) heard of his
whereabouts, and by the intervention of his brother,Captain James Coleridge,
his discharge was procured. He returned for a short time to Cambridge, but
quitted the university without a degree in 1794. In the same year he visited
Oxford, and after a short tour in Wales went to Bristol, where he met
Southey. The French Revolution had stirred the mind of Southey to its
depths. Coleridge received with rapture his new friends scheme of
Pantisocracy. On the banks of the Susquehanna was to be founded a brotherly
community, where selfishness was to be extinguished, and the virtues were to
reign supreme. No funds were forthcoming, and in 1795, to the chagrin of
Coleridge, the scheme was dropped. In 1794 The Fall of Robespierre, of which
Coleridge wrote the first act and Southey the other two, appeared. At
Bristol Coleridge formed the acquaintance of Joseph Cottle, the bookseller,
who offered him thirty guineas for a volume of poems. In October of 1795
Coleridge married Sarah Fricker, and took up his residence at Clevedon on
the Bristol Channel. A few weeks afterwards Southey married a sister of Mrs
Coleridge, and on the same day quitted England for Portugal.
Coleridge began to lecture in Bristol on politics and religion. He embodied
the first two lectures in his first prose publication, Condone, ad Populuvi
(1795). The book contained much invective against Pitt, and in after life
Coleridge declared that, with this exception, and a few pages involving
philosophical tenets which he afterwards rejected, there was little or
nothing he desired to retract. The first volume of Poems was published by
Cottle early in 1796. Coleridge projected a periodical called The Watchman,
and in 1796 undertook a journey, well described in the Bibgraphia~
Literaria, to enlist subscribers. The Watchma~,1 had a brief life of two
months, but at this time Coleridge began to think of becoming a Unitarian
preacher, and abandoning literature for ever. Hazlitt has recorded his very
favorable impression of a remarkable sermon delivered at Shrewsbury; but
there are other accounts of Coleridges preaching not so enthusiastic. In.
the summer of 1795 he met for the first time the brother poet with whose
name his own will be for ever associated. Wordsworth and his sister had
established themselves at Racedown in the Dorsetshire hills, and here
Coleridge visited them in 1797. There are few things in literary history
more remarkable than this friendship. The gifted Dorothy Wordsworth
described Coleridge as thin and pale, the lower part of the face not good,
wide mouth, thick lips, not very good teeth, longish, loose, half-curling,
rough, black hair,but all was forgotten in the magic charm of his utterance.
Wordsworth, who declared, The only wonderful man I ever knew was Coleridge,
seems at once to have desired to see more of his new friend. He and his
sister removed in July 1797 to Alfoxden, near Nether Stowey, to be in
Coleridges neighborhood, and in the most delightful and unrestrained
intercourse the friends spent many happy days. It was the delight of each
one to communicate to the other the productions of his mind, and the
creative faculty of both poets was now at its best. One evening, at Watchett
on the British Channel, The Ancient Mariner first took shape. Coleridge was
anxious to embody a dream of a friend, and the suggestion of the shooting of
the albatross came from Wordsworth, who gained the idea from Shelvockes
Voyage (1726). A joint volume was planned. Wordsworth was to show the real
poetry that lies hidden in commonplace subjects, while Coleridge was to
treat supernatural subjects to illustrate the common emotions of humanity.
From this sprang the Lyrical Ballads, to which Coleridge contributed The
Ancient Mariner, the Nightingale and two scenes from Osorio, and after much
cogitation the book was published in 1798 at Bristol by Cottle, to whose
reminiscences, often indulging too much in dej~ail, we owe the account of
this remarkable time. A second edition of the Lyrical Ballads in 1800
included another poem by ColeridgeLove, to which subsequently the sub-title
was given of An Introduction to the Tale of the Dark Ladie. To the Stowey
period belong also the tragedy of Osorio (afterwards known as Remorse),
Kubla Khan and the first part of Christabel. In 1798 an annuity, granted him
by the brothers Wedgwood, led Coleridge to abandon his reluctantly formed
intention of becoming a Unitarian minister. For many years he had desired to
see the continent, and in September 1798, in company with Wordsworth and his
sister, he left England for Hamburg. Satyranes Letters (republished in Biog.
Lit. 1817) give an account of the tour. -
A new period in Coleridges life now began. He soon left the Wordsworths to
spend four months at Ratzeburg, whence he removed to Gottingen to attend
lectures. A great intellectual movement had begun in Germany. Coleridge was
soon in the full whirl of excitement. He learnt much from Blumenbach and
Eichhorn, and took interest in all that was going on around him. During his
stay of nine months in Germany, he made himself master of the language to
such purpose that the translation of Wallensteinhis first piece of literary
work after his return to Englandwas actually accomplished in six weeks. It
was published in 1800, and, although it failed to make any impression on the
general public, it became at once prized by Scott and others as it deserved.
It is matter for regret that a request to Coleridge that he should undertake
to translate Faust never received serious attention from him. During these
years Coleridge wrote many newspaper articles and some poems,. among them
Fire, Famine and Slaughter, for the Morning Post (January 8, 1798). He had
vehemently opposed Pitts policy, but a change came over his way of thought,
and he found himself separatedfrom Fox on the question of a struggle with
Napoleon. He had lost his admiration for the Revolutionists, as his Ode to
France shows (Morning Post, April 16, 1798). Like many other Whigs, he felt
that all questions of domestic policy must at a time of European peril be
postponed. Fcom this time, however, his value for the ordered liberty of
constitutional government increased; and though never exactly to be found
among the ranks of old-fashioned Constitutionalists, during the remainder of
his life he kept steadily in view the principles which received their full
exposition in his wellknown work on Church and State. In the year 1800
Coleridge left London for the Lakes. Here in that year he wrote the second
part of Christabel. in 1803 Southey became a joint lodger with Coleridge at
Greta Hall, Keswick, of which in 1812 Southey became sole tenant and
occupier.
In 1801 begins the period of Coleridges life during which, in spite of the
evidence of work shown in his compositions, he sank more and more under the
dominion of opium, in which he may have first indulged at Cambridge. Few
things are so sad to read as the letters in which he j.letails the
consequences of his transgression. He was occasionally seen in London during
the first years of the century, and wherever he appeared he was the delight
of admiring circles. He toured in Scotland with the Wordsworths in 1803,
visited Malta in 1804, when for ten months he acted as secretary to the
governor, and stayed nearly eight months at Naples and Rome in 1805-1806. In
Rome he received a hint that his articles in the Morning Post had been
brought to Napoleons notice, and he made the voyage from Leghorn in an
American ship. On a visit to Somersetshire in 1807 he met De Quincey for the
first time, and the younger mans admiration was shown by a gift of 300, from
an unknown friend. In 1809 he started a magazine called The Friend, which
continued only for eight months. At the same time Coleridge began to
contribute to the Courier. In 1808 he lectured at the Royal Institution, but
with little success, and two years later he gave his lectures on Shakespeare
and other poets. These lectures attracted great attention and were followed
by two other series. In 1812 his income from the Wedgwoods was reduced, and
he settled the remainder on his wife. His friends were generous in assisting
him with money. Eventually Mackintosh obtained a grant of 100 a year for him
in 1824 during the lifetime of George IV., as one of the royal associates of
the Society of Literature, and at different times he received help
principally from Stuart, the publisher, Poole, Sotheby, Sir George Beaumont,
Byron and Wordsworth, while his children shared Southeys home at Keswick.
But between 1812 and 1817 Coleridge made a good deal by his work, and was
able to send money to his wife in addition to the annuity she received. The
tragedy of Remorse was produced at Drury Lane in 1813, and met with
considerable success. Three years after this, having failed to conquer the
opium habit, he determined to enter the family of Mr James Gillman, who
lived at Highgate. The letter in which he discloses his misery to this kind
and thoughtful man gives a real insight into his character. Under judicious
treatment the hour of mastery at last arrived. The shore was reached, but
the vessel had been miserably shattered in its passage through the rocks.
For the rest of his life he hardly ever left his home at Highgate. During
his residence there, Christabel, written many years before, and known to a
favored few, was first published in a volume with Kubla K/ian and the Pains
of Sleep in 1816. He read widely and wisely, in poetry, philosophy and
divinity. In 1816 and the following year, he gave his Lay Sermons to the
world. Sibylline Leaves appeared in 1817; the Biographia Literaria and a
revised edition of The Friend soon followed. Seven years afterwards his most
popular prose workThe Aids to Reflectionfirst appeared. His last
publication, in 1830, was the work on Church and State. It was not till 1840
that his Confessions of an Inquiring Spirit, by far his most seminal work,
was posthumously published. In 1833 he appeared at the meeting of the
British Association at Cambridge, but he died in the following year (25th of
July 1834), and was buried in the churchyard close to the house of Mr
Giliman, where he had enjoyed every consolation which friendship and love
could render. Coleridge died in the communion of the Church of England, of
whose polity and teaching he had been for many years a loving admirer. An
interesting letter to his god-child, written twelve days before his death,
sums up his spiritual experience in a most touching form.
Of the extraordinary influence which he exercised in conversation it is
impossible to speak fully here. Many of the most remarkable among the
younger men of that period resorted to Highgate as to the shrine of an
oracle, and although one or two disparaging judgments, such as that of
Carlyle, have been recorded, there can be no doubt that since Samuel Johnson
there had been no such power in England. His nephew, Henry Nelson Coleridge,
gathered together some specimens of the Table Talk of the few last years.
But remarkable as these are for the breadth of sympathy and extent of
reading disclosed, they will hardly convey the impressions furnished in a
dramatic form, as in Boswells great work. Four volumes of Literary Remains
were published after his death, and these, along with the chapters on the
poetry of Wordsworth in the Biographia Literaria, may be said to exhibit the
full range of Coleridges power as a critic of poetry. In this region he
stands supreme. With regard to the preface, which contains Wordsworths
theory, Coleridge has honestly expressed his dissent: With many parts of
this preface, in the sense attributed to them, and which the words
undoubtedly seem to authorize, I never concurred; but, on the contrary,
objected to them as erroneous in principle, and contradictory (in appearance
at least) both to other parts of the same preface, and to the authors own
practice in the greater number of the poems themselves. This disclaimer of
perfect agreement renders the remaining portion of what he says more
valuable. Coleridge was in England the creator of that higher criticism
which had already in Germany accomplished 50 much in the hands of Lessing
and Goethe. It is enough to refer here to the fragmentary series of his
Shakespearian criticisms, containing evidence of the ~truest insight, and a
marvellous appreciation of the judicial sanity which raises the greatest
name in literature far above even the highest of the poets who approached
him.
As a poet Coieridges own place is safe. His niche in the great gallery of
English poets is secure. Of no one can it be more emphatically said that at
his highest he was of imagination all compact. He does not possess the fiery
pulse and humaneness of Burns, but the exquisite perfection. of his metre
and the subtle alliance of his tho,ught and expression must always secure
for him the warmest admiration of true lovers of poetic art. In his early
poems may be found traces of the fierce struggle of his youth. The most
remarkable is the Monody on the Death of Chatterton and the Religious
Musings. In what may be called his second period, the ode entitled France,
considered by Shelley the finest in the language, is most memorable. The
whole soul of the poet is reflected in the Ode to Dejection. The well-known
lines 0 Lady! we receive but what we give, And in our life alone does nature
live; Ours is her wedding garment, ours her shroud, with the passage which
follows, contain more vividly, perhaps, than anything which Coleridge has
written, the expression of the shaping and coloring function which he
assigns, in the Biograplzia Literaria, to imagination. Christabel and the
Ancient Mariner have so completely taken possession of the highest place,
that it is n.eedless to do more than allude to them. The supernatural has
never received such treatment as in these two wonderful productions of his
genius, and though the first of them remains a torso, it is the loveliest
torso in the gallery of English literature. Although Coleridge had, for many
years before his death, almost entirely forsaken. poetry, the few fragments
of work which remain, written in later years, show little trace of weakness,
although they are wanting in the unearthly melody which imparts such a charm
to Kubla Khan, Love and Youth and Age. (G. D. B.; H. Cu.)
In. the latter part of his life, and for the generation which followed,
Coleridge was ranked by many young English churchmen of liberal views as the
greatest religious thinker of their time. As Carlyle has told in his Life of
Sterling, the poets distinction, in the eyes of the younger churchmen with
philosophic interests, lay in his having recovered and preserved his
Christian faith after having passed through periods of rationalism and
Unitarianism, and faced the full results of German criticism and philosophy.
His opinions, however, were at all periods somewhat mutable, and it would be
difficult to state them in any form that would hold good for the whole even
of his later writings. He was, indeed, too receptive of thought impressions
of all kinds to be a consistent systematizer. As a schoolboy, by his own
account, he was for a time a Voltairean, on the strength of a perusal of the
Philosophical Dictionary. At colleje, as we have seen, he turned Unitarian.
From that position he gradually moved towards pantheism, a way of thought to
which he had shown remarkable leanings when, as a schoolboy, he discoursed
of Neo-Platonism to Charles Lamb, orif we may trust his
recollectiontranslated the hymns of Synesius. Early in life, too, he met
with the doctrines of Jacob Behmen, of whom, in the Biograp/zia LiterOria,
he speaks with affection and gratitude as having given him vital philosophic
guidance. Between pantheism and Unitarianism he seems to have balanced till
his thirty-fifth year, always tending towards the former in. virtue of the
recoil from anthropomorphism which originally took him to TLJnitarianism. In
1796, when he named his first child David Hartley, but would not have him
baptized, he held by the Christian materialism of the writer in question,
whom in his Religious Musings he terms wisest of mortal kind.
When, again, he met Wordsworth in 1797, the two poets freely and
sympathetically discussed Spinoza, for whom Coleridge always retained a deep
admiration; and when in 1798 he gave up his Unitarian preaching, he named
his second child Berkeley, signifying a new allegiance, but still without
accepting Christian rites otherwise than nassivelv. Shortly afterwards he
went to Germany, where he began. to study Kant, and was much captivated by
Lessing. In the Biographia he avows that the writings of Kant more than any
other work, at once invigorated and disciplined my understanding ; yet the
gist of his estimate there is that Kant left his system undeveloped, as
regards his idea of the Noumenon, for fear of orthodox persecutiona judgment
hardly compatible with any assumption of Kants Christian orthodoxy, which
was notoriously inadequate. But after his stay at Malta, Coleridge announced
to his friends that he had given up his Socinianism (of which ever
afterwards he spoke with asperity), professing a return to Christian faith,
though still putting on it a mystical construction, as when he told Crabb
Robinson that Jesus Christ was a Platonic philosopher. At this stage he was
much in sympathy with the historicorationalistic criticism of the Old
Testament, as carried on in Germany; giving his assent, for instance, to the
naturalistic doctrine of Schillers Die Sendung Moses. From about 1810
onwards, however, he openly professed Christian. orthodoxy, while privately
indicating views which cannot be so described. And even his published
speculations were such as to draw from J. H. Newman a protest that they took
a liberty which no Christian can tolerate, and carried him to conclusions
which were often heathen rather than. Christian. This would apply to some of
his positions concerning the Logos and the Trinity. After giving up
Unitarianism he claimed that from the first he had been a Trinitarian on
Platonic lines; and some of his latest statements of the doctrine are
certailily more pantheistic than Christian.
The explanation seems to be that while on Christian grounds he repeatedly
denounced pantheism as being in all its forms equivalent to atheism, be was
latterly much swayed by the thought of Schelling in the pantheistic
direction which was natural to him. To these conflicting tendencies were
probably due his -self-c6ntradictions on the problem of original sin and the
conflicting claims of feeling and reason. It would seem that, in the extreme
spiritual vicissitudes of his life, conscious alternately of personal
weakness and of the largest speculative grasp, he at times threw himself
entirely on the consolations of evangelical faith, and at others
reconstructed the cosmos for himself in terms of Neo-Platonism and the
philosophy of Schelling. So great were his variations even in his latter
years, that he could speak to his friend Allsop in a highly latitudinarian
sense, declaring that in Christianity the miracles are supererogatory, and
that the law of God and the great principles of the Christian religion.
would have been the same had Christ never assumed humanity.
From Schelling, whom he praised as having developed Kant where Fichte failed
to do so, he borrowed much and often, not only in the metaphysical sections
of the Biographia but in his aesthetic lectures, and further in the cosmic
speculations of the posthumous Theory of Life. On the first score he makes
but an equivocal acknowledgment, claiming to have thought on Schellings
lines before reading him; but it has been shown by Hamilton and Ferrier that
besides transcribing much from Schel]ing without avowal he silently
appropriated the learning of Maass on. philosophical history. In other
directions he laid under tribute Herder and Lessing; yet all the while he
cast severe imputations of plagiarism upon Hume and others. His own
plagiarisms were doubtless facilitated by the physiological effects of
opium.
Inasmuch as he finally followed in philosophy the mainly poetical or
theosophic movement of Schelling, which satisfied neither the logical needs
appealed to by Hegel nor the new demand for naturalistic induction,
Coleridge, after arousing a great amount of philosophic interest in his own
country in the second quarter of the century, has ceased to make a school.
Thus his significance in intellectual history remains that of a great
stimulator. He undoubtedly did much to deepen and liberalize Christian
thought in England, his influence being specially marked in the school of F.
D. Maurice, and in the lives of men like John Sterling. And even his many
borrowings from the German were assimilated with a rare Dower of
de,velonmenL
which bore fruit not only in a widening of the fiuld of English philosophy
but in the larger scientific thought of a later generation. , (J. M. Ro.)
Of Coleridges four children, two (Hartley and Sara) are separately noticed.
His second child, Berkeley, died when a baby. The third, Derwent
(1800-1883), a distinguished scholar and author, was master of Helston
school, Cornwall (1825-1841), first principal of St Marks College, Chelsea
(1841-1864), and rector of Hanwell (1864-1880); and his daughter Christabel
(b. I843) and son Ernest Hartley (b. 1846) both became well known in the
world of letters, the former as a novelist, the latter as, a biographer and
critic.
After Coleridges death several of his wcrks were edited by his nephew, Henry
Nelson Coleridge, the husband of Sara, the poets only daughter. In 1847 Sara
Coleridge published the Biographi a Literaria, enriched with annotations and
biographical supplement from her own pen. Three volumes of political
writings, entitled Essays on isis Own Times, were also published by Sara
Coleridge in 1850. The standard life of Coleridge is that by J. Dykes
Campbell (1894); his letters were edited by E. H. Coleridge.>>
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Art Neuendorffer
David L. Webb
"Art Neuendorffer" <aneuendor...@comcast.net>
(aneuendor...@comicass.nut) wrote:
> "David L. Webb" <david....@dartmouth.edu> wrote
>
> > I realize that English is not your native tongue, Art
> > (what *is* your native tongue anyway, Art -- COBOL?),
> I only learned it so that I could read Lynne's USS Hopper button.
Then what *is* your native tongue, Art? It can scarcely be English.
> (I've discovered that Lynne has some sort of fetish for buttons
> but she doesn't quite reach my pupik.)
She has a chalk fetish too, apparently.
[...]
> > > > > ENCOMIUM is English, Dave. The plural is ENCOMIUMS
> > > "David L. Webb" <david....@dartmouth.edu> wrote
> > >
> > > > No, there are *two* correct English plurals, as the OED confirms.
> > "Art Neuendorffer" <aneuendor...@comcast.net>
>
> > > Then how come all the famous good writers use ENCOMIUMS;
> > > while all the literary historical hacks use ENCOMIA?
> "David L. Webb" <david....@dartmouth.edu> wrote
>
> > If you are unaware that Isaiah Berlin is a famous
> > good writer, Art, then you are a moron indeed.
> And I thought I was a Neufrino.
You're a moron Neufrino, Art, not an electron Neufrino.
[Lunatic logorrhea snipped]
LynnE
"David L. Webb" <david....@dartmouth.edu> wrote in message
news:david.l.webb-164D...@merrimack.dartmouth.edu...
> In article <h8KdnaaHyfz...@comcast.com>,
> "Art Neuendorffer" <aneuendor...@comcast.net>
>
> (aneuendor...@comicass.nut) wrote:
>
> > "David L. Webb" <david....@dartmouth.edu> wrote
> >
> > > I realize that English is not your native tongue, Art
> > > (what *is* your native tongue anyway, Art -- COBOL?),
>
> > I only learned it so that I could read Lynne's USS Hopper button.
>
> Then what *is* your native tongue, Art? It can scarcely be English.
>
> > (I've discovered that Lynne has some sort of fetish for buttons
> > but she doesn't quite reach my pupik.)
>
> She has a chalk fetish too, apparently.
Fame at last.
Mouse
Art Neuendorffer
> >
> > > I realize that English is not your native tongue, Art
> > > (what *is* your native tongue anyway, Art -- COBOL?),
> > I only learned it so that I could read Lynne's USS Hopper button.
> > Let us here consider the caSUS,
> > my dear little COUSIS
> > of the Ondt and the GraceHOPEr.
> > but she doesn't quite reach my pupik.)
> She has a CHALK fetish too, apparently.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
WHAT IS THE ONDT, SIR?
You really figured out what I was up to. And I especially
Paul C. asks the question
"A good question." GOD walks to his blackboard and begins
"It's a beautiful and clEVER proof," Paul C. declares. "Certainly up
"GEE WILLikers." GOD is dismayed.
But suddenly the uniVERsE begins to change.
Gradually they became more brilliant. The Earth, which has
<<But if the first heire of my inuention proue deformed,
I shall be sorie it had so noble a GOD-father:
and NEUER after EARE SO BARREN A LAND,
for feare it yeeld me still so bad a haruest,>>
O T H E O {N}L i[E| B E G E T T E R O
F T H E S E {I}n[S| U I N G S O N N E
T S M R W h a {L|L|H] A P P I{N}E S S
E A N D t h a t {E|T]{e}R N I T{I}E P
R O M I S E D [B|Y|O] U{r}E V E R{L}I
V I N G P O [E]t W|I] S H{e}T H T H{E}
|W]E L L W I S h I N G A{d V e}N T U
|R]E R I N S E t T I N G F O R T H T
------------------------------------------
> >
> > > If you are unaware that Isaiah Berlin is a famous
> > > good writer, Art, then you are a moron indeed.
> > And I thought I was a Neufrino.
Peter Farey
"C. Lariad" wrote:
>
> I've read just a little of her work (and the other
> person's), and she seems to be very thorough with
> footnotes, citing many primary sources. She's also
> an engaging writer. I do wish, however, that she
> retation instead of as fact. Perhaps she wanted to
> appear strong or supportive of her cause.
There's no "perhaps" about it. This was one of the
main difficulties we had in being co-authors. I
thought much the same as you, while she found me
far too tentative in my conclusions.
Peter Farey
Nigel Frizer wrote:
>
> Peter Farey wrote:
> >
> > Bob Grumman wrote:
> >
> > > Tom Reedy wrote:
> > >
> > > > Art, along with the rest of the antiStratfordians,
> > > > cannot bear to contemplate the idea that they are
> > > > wrong and that they've been wasting their lives in
> > > > their "research." The rational response would be to
> > > > salvage what time they have left in more profitable
> > > > pursuits, but their particular form of mental
> > > > illness precludes them from that action. Instead,
> > > > they throw good after bad by engaging in ever more
> > > > "research" to justify their life's waste.
> >
> > > They are also providing wonderfully detailed examples
> > > of cerebral dysfunctionality for psychologists and
> > > other students of irrationality.
> >
> > Bob, what excellent timing! A perfect example of yet
> > another who dives for cover as soon as the questions
> > get too difficult.
>
> I hope, mr farey, that you do not presume to include me
> in these thoughts.
What's with the 'mr farey' crap, Nige? Nah, look back a
post or two in the thread, and it should be quite clear
that it was Reedy I was having a go at. You at least
(like Buffalo and Lynne) tell me that you will get back
to me on the subject *one* day!
> Time permitting, i would never excuse myself from any
> debate - unfortunately i am excessively busy at the
> moment and have no time for HLAS flights of fantasy-
> i have not, however, forgotten your request for a
> critique and, supposing you still desire it, shall
> deliver it unto you at the first moment i have at hand.
Splendid. And should you also feel like responding to
each of the points I made in answer to your rather
hasty attack on my theory last time, I would be over
the moon. Cheers mate.
Chess One
VOMERE : PLOUGHSHARE (Italian, Latin)
PLOWSHARE, PLOUGHSHARE, n. The SHARE of a PLOW,
or that part which cuts the slice of earth or sod at the bottom of the
furrow.
------------
PLOWEFERE: Companion in play [A. Sax.].
Phil
David L. Webb
"Art Neuendorffer" <aneuendor...@comcast.net>
(aneuendor...@comicass.nut) wrote:
[...]
> > > "David L. Webb" <david....@dartmouth.edu> wrote
> > >
> > > > If you are unaware that Isaiah Berlin is a famous
> > > > good writer, Art, then you are a moron indeed.
> > "Art Neuendorffer" <aneuendor...@comcast.net>
>
> > > And I thought I was a Neufrino.
> "David L. Webb" <david....@dartmouth.edu> wrote
>
> > You're a moron Neufrino, Art, not an electron Neufrino.
> Well, my wife keeps telling me that I have too much Mass.
Are you sure she isn't telling you that you're too much of an...neVER
mind.
> (But, heck, otherwise I'd have hardly any properties at all.)
>
> Art Neufrino. (What, Me Interact!)
Don't feel miffed, Art; there is some chance that you are involved in
the strong interaction as well. In fact, I think that you should get in
touch with the people at CERN -- my understanding is that many
researchers there are quite interested in QCD, and hence in particular
in screwballs.
Christian Lanciai
She was perhaps more reliant on her intuition, faith and instinct than
on solid facts, since so many vital solid facts are still missing. Of
course, intuition is not a valid substitution for scientific proof,
but on the other hand, that does not in any way prove her wrong. What
was self-evident to her instincts, we at least should be just enough
to keep a door open to the possibility of.
Chris
Art Neuendorffer
> > > >
> > > > > If you are unaware that Isaiah Berlin is a famous
> > > > > good writer, Art, then you are a moron indeed.
>
> > > "Art Neuendorffer" <aneuendor...@comcast.net>
> >
> > > > And I thought I was a Neufrino.
>
> > "David L. Webb" <david....@dartmouth.edu> wrote
> >
> > > You're a moron Neufrino, Art, not an electron Neufrino.
> "Art Neuendorffer" <aneuendor...@comcast.net>
> > Well, my wife keeps telling me that I have too much Mass.
>
> Are you sure she isn't telling you that
> you're too much of an...neVER mind.
A Catholic? What'll Buckeye Pete finds out!
> "Art Neuendorffer" <aneuendor...@comcast.net>
> > (But, heck, otherwise I'd have hardly any properties at all.)
> >
> > Art Neufrino. (What, Me Interact!)
"David L. Webb" <david....@dartmouth.edu> wrote
> Don't feel miffed, Art; there is some chance that you are involved
> in the strong interaction as well. In fact, I think that you should
> get in touch with the people at CERN -
Maximilian Kohler?
"David L. Webb" <david....@dartmouth.edu> wrote
> - my understanding is that many researchers there are quite
> interested in QCD, and hence in particular in screwballs.
That's CLEWballs, I believe.
--------------------------------------------------------------
Emily Dickinson (1830-86).
Complete Poems. Part Four: Time and Eternity
So I must baffle at the hint
And cipher at the sign,
And make much blunder, if at last
I take the clew divine.
-----------------------------------------------------------
Art Neufrino (Lost in a maze while being Monitaured
by something that's half bull & half ass...
and that still trying to finish its Theseus!)
Art Neuendorffer
> > > >
> > > > > If you are unaware that Isaiah Berlin is a famous
> > > > > good writer, Art, then you are a moron indeed.
>
> > > "Art Neuendorffer" <aneuendor...@comcast.net>
> >
> > > > And I thought I was a Neufrino.
>
> > "David L. Webb" <david....@dartmouth.edu> wrote
> >
> > > You're a moron Neufrino, Art, not an electron Neufrino.
> "Art Neuendorffer" <aneuendor...@comcast.net>
> > Well, my wife keeps telling me that I have too much Mass.
>
> Are you sure she isn't telling you that
> you're too much of an...neVER mind.
A Catholic? Wait 'til Buckeye Pete finds out!
> "Art Neuendorffer" <aneuendor...@comcast.net>
> > (But, heck, otherwise I'd have hardly any properties at all.)
> >
> > Art Neufrino. (What, Me Interact!)
"David L. Webb" <david....@dartmouth.edu> wrote
> Don't feel miffed, Art; there is some chance that you are involved
> in the strong interaction as well. In fact, I think that you should
> get in touch with the people at CERN -
Maximilian Kohler?
"David L. Webb" <david....@dartmouth.edu> wrote
> - my understanding is that many researchers there are quite
> interested in QCD, and hence in particular in screwballs.
That's CLEWballs, I believe.
David L. Webb
"Art Neuendorffer" <aneuendor...@comcast.net>
(aneuendor...@comicass.nut) wrote:
> > > > > "David L. Webb" <david....@dartmouth.edu> wrote
> > > > >
> > > > > > If you are unaware that Isaiah Berlin is a famous
> > > > > > good writer, Art, then you are a moron indeed.
> > > > "Art Neuendorffer" <aneuendor...@comcast.net>
> > >
> > > > > And I thought I was a Neufrino.
> > > "David L. Webb" <david....@dartmouth.edu> wrote
> > >
> > > > You're a moron Neufrino, Art, not an electron Neufrino.
> > "Art Neuendorffer" <aneuendor...@comcast.net>
>
> > > Well, my wife keeps telling me that I have too much Mass.
> > Are you sure she isn't telling you that
> > you're too much of an...neVER mind.
> A Catholic? What'll [sic] Buckeye Pete finds out!
Is English your native tongue, Art? It isn't that you're fat, Art;
it's just that you're a fat-head.
> > "Art Neuendorffer" <aneuendor...@comcast.net>
>
> > > (But, heck, otherwise I'd have hardly any properties at all.)
> > >
> > > Art Neufrino. (What, Me Interact!)
> "David L. Webb" <david....@dartmouth.edu> wrote
>
> > Don't feel miffed, Art; there is some chance that you are involved
> > in the strong interaction as well. In fact, I think that you should
> > get in touch with the people at CERN -
> Maximilian Kohler?
You've been reading more dreadful pulp fiction, Art.
> "David L. Webb" <david....@dartmouth.edu> wrote
>
> > - my understanding is that many researchers there are quite
> > interested in QCD, and hence in particular in screwballs.
> That's CLEWballs, I believe.
If you insist, Art:
<http://www.computer-games-station.com/video-games/9146.htm>.
I always thought that your posts were an inept game of snooker.
> --------------------------------------------------------------
> Emily Dickinson (1830-86).
> Complete Poems. Part Four: Time and Eternity
>
> So I must baffle at the hint
I agree that you're slow on the uptake, Art.
> And cipher at the sign,
> And make much blunder,
Well, if so, then you're on the right track, Art.
> if at last
> I take the clew divine.
> -----------------------------------------------------------
>
> Art Neufrino (Lost in a maze while being Monitaured
> by something that's half bull & half ass...
> and that still trying to finish its Theseus!)
Excellent, Art! Not in vain did I nickname you Pasiphae seVERal
years ago.
Art Neuendorffer
> > > > > >
>>>>>>> If you are unaware that Isaiah Berlin is a famous
>>>>>>> good writer, Art, then you are a moron indeed.
>
> > > > > "Art Neuendorffer" <aneuendor...@comcast.net>
> > > >
> > > > > > And I thought I was a Neufrino.
>
>>>> "David L. Webb" <david....@dartmouth.edu> wrote
> > > >
>>>>> You're a moron Neufrino, Art, not an electron Neufrino.
>
> > > "Art Neuendorffer" <aneuendor...@comcast.net>
> >
>>>> Well, my wife keeps telling me that I have too much Mass.
>
> > > Are you sure she isn't telling you that
> > > you're too much of an...neVER mind.
> "Art Neuendorffer" <aneuendor...@comcast.net>
>
> > A Catholic? What'll [sic] Buckeye Pete finds out!
"David L. Webb" <david....@dartmouth.edu> wrote
> Is English your native tongue, Art?
Is Emglish yours, Dave?
------------------------------------------------------
David L. Webb" <david.l.w...@dartmouth.edu> wrote
> Thus words that were originally Greek but entered
> English via Latin often have two or three plural forms,
> one a Greek-style plural form, another a Latin-style plural
> form, and sometimes another Emglish-style [sic] plural form.
---------------------------------------------------------------
> > > "Art Neuendorffer" <aneuendor...@comcast.net>
> >
> > > > (But, heck, otherwise I'd have hardly any properties at all.)
> > > >
> > > > Art Neufrino. (What, Me Interact!)
>
> > "David L. Webb" <david....@dartmouth.edu> wrote
> >
> > > Don't feel miffed, Art; there is some chance that you are involved
> > > in the strong interaction as well. In fact, I think that you should
> > > get in touch with the people at CERN -
>
> > Maximilian Kohler?
>
> You've been reading more dreadful pulp fiction, Art.
>
> > "David L. Webb" <david....@dartmouth.edu> wrote
> >
> > > - my understanding is that many researchers there are quite
> > > interested in QCD, and hence in particular in screwballs.
>
> > That's CLEWballs, I believe.
"David L. Webb" <david....@dartmouth.edu> wrote
> If you insist, Art:
> <http://www.computer-games-station.com/video-games/9146.htm>.
> I always thought that your posts were an inept game of snooker.
The will be peace in our time!
<<The game of snooker was invented in India in 1875 by a bloke called
Neville Chamberlain who ended up as the last ever Inspector-General
of the Royal Irish Constabulary? >> - Nicholas Whyte
> "Art Neuendorffer" <aneuendor...@comcast.net>
> > ---------------------------------------------------------
> > Emily Dickinson (1830-86).
> > Complete Poems. Part Four: Time and Eternity
> >
> > So I must baffle at the hint
"David L. Webb" <david....@dartmouth.edu> wrote
> I agree that you're slow on the uptake, Art.
>
> > And cipher at the sign,
> > And make much blunder,
"David L. Webb" <david....@dartmouth.edu> wrote
> Well, if so, then you're on the right track, Art.
>
> > if at last
> > I take the clew divine.
> > -----------------------------------------------------------
> >
> > Art Neufrino (Lost in a maze while being Monitaured
> > by something that's half bull & half ass...
> > and that is still trying to finish its Theseus!)
"David L. Webb" <david....@dartmouth.edu> wrote
> Excellent, Art!
But, of course, you don't have a Clew.
Art
lar...@yahoo.com
pioneer researcher in Marlovian archaeology to have, and even
if one only notices clues and patterns that aren't completely
conclusive, it is important to report them, but when
writing of such results, one should remember that some
readers might not be knowledgeable and might believe more than
they should without questioning it.
Furthermore, I'm sure Ms. Wraight knew scholars and others who
had many years of expertise like herself, and she must have
been aware that their intuition and studies led to completely
different conclusions, so why not at least admit that the issue
is complex, and that she might not know all the answers.
That said, I do hope her books are published anyway, and I agree
that we shouldn't assume that she is wrong.
C.