leine croich
Nebulous
The yellow shirts are coming, doesn't really suit our image, does it?
Neb
The Phantom Piper
>
> Ah, but can you really trust an Englishman or a Bruce?
And why wouldn't one be able to Trust a Bruce?
Obviously, you get your Scottish 'History' from
Master Mel's 'Bravefart'. That bit with Bruce as
a snivelling betrayer was just as phony as the
supposed Romance with the Princess - who was
in fact *eight years old* at the time - or Bravefart
as a rough, downtrodden, thatched-hut-dwelling
villager (he wasn't).
I suppose you also believe that 'MacBeth' is an
accurate portrayal as well, and have No Clue
(as usual) that it was written with the 'help' (and
possibly on the direct orders) of James VI & I,
who wanted to piss off his hated wife with it by
slandering her family.
What a moronic buffoon you are.
Not Surprised At All,
The Phantom Piper
The Phantom Piper
<nothing of consequence>
Oi, Wee Freddie: was it "Ghandi" who taught you to speak like that?
<*snicker*>,
The Phantom Piper
La N
>
> I suppose you also believe that 'MacBeth' is an
> accurate portrayal as well, and have No Clue
> (as usual) that it was written with the 'help' (and
> possibly on the direct orders) of James VI & I,
> who wanted to piss off his hated wife with it by
> slandering her family.
>
> What a moronic buffoon you are.
>
>
Out, damn'd spot! out, I say!-One; two: why, then
'tis time to do't.-Hell is murky.-Fie, my lord, fie, a soldier, and
afeard? What need we fear who knows it, when none can call our
pow'r to accompt?-Yet who would have thought the old man to
have had so much blood in him?
- Lady MacBeth
- nilita, don't know what made me think of that ...;)
Allan
"The Phantom Piper" <ThePhan...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:d2df3c2c-09ed-433b...@c9g2000yqm.googlegroups.com...
Not Surprised At All,
**************************************
It hs to be admitted that Bruce was at times in the English service though!
That doesnt't take away from his later greatness.
The affair with the English Princess in Braveheart wasn't based on
historical fact but at the same time it wasn't invented out of nothing. Much
of the book and film is based on the great epic written by Blind Harry. In
the poem Wallace has an affair with the English Queen (ie Edward's wife)
whereas Randall Wallace changed that to his daughter-in-law.
I think you got the wrong end of the stick with the Macbeth thing. I think
the play was very much based on Holinshed's earlier work. Yes the slant was
there to please James but surely it has nothing to do with his wife - who
was Anne of Denmark and presumably not related to Macbeth! The Stuart
monarchs were themselves descended from Duncan who Macbeth deposed so surely
the play was meant to please James - rather than displease his wife?
Allan
Jane Margaret Laight
> "The Phantom Piper" <ThePhantomPi...@comcast.net> wrote in messagenews:d2df3c2c-09ed-433b...@c9g2000yqm.googlegroups.com...
I think you hit the nail on the head, but I would think the point
would be better made thusly--when you are correct that the Stuarts
were descended from Duncan, I think Wullie Shakespeare was emphasizing
descent from Duncan's eldest son Malcolm Canmore who takes a more
active role in history--avenges his father's death and recaptures the
throne for his descendants--the autodidact James VI & I would have
appreciated it more rather than the relatively passuve Duncan who ,
while Macduff, who was untimely ripped from his mother's womb, did the
actual dirty work in taking out Macbeth.
Allan
"Jane Margaret Laight" <jml2...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:b5b849b3-ee3b-4a5f...@j32g2000yqh.googlegroups.com...
**********************************
You're probably right :-) King Duncan wasn't very succesful certainly as
far as soldiering goes.
Allan
The Phantom Piper
>
> Macduff, who was untimely ripped from his mother's womb,
> did the actual dirty work in taking out Macbeth.
...as Malcolm stood by and watched. And yes, I had
misremembered something: Shakespeare (with James
possibly acting as Ghostwriter or uncredited coauthor)
wasn't slandering Anne's family, but rather Anne herself,
whilst aggrandising James' lineage. The facts are that
MacBeth killed Duncan in single combat in the middle
of a battle brought on by Duncan himself, who was far
from being "venerable" as Shakespeare/James would
have it, but all of 27 years old at the time of his death.
Both men were wounded in the duel - Duncan suffering
from haemophilia as well as the bellicose bloodlust which
had cost him previous battles, and succumbing shortly
thereafter. So much for the 'murder' of 'kind' King Duncan
by the 'evil' MacBeth. Who was married, incidentally, to
Gruoch, granddaughter of Kenneth III and never recorded
as having any 'Ambition' exceeding her already quite regal
lineage. However, when the play was being written the
part of the Wife was made particularly noxious, with the
notion that parallels might be drawn to Queen Anne, whom
James disliked. I knew I had read something like this from
Nigel Tranter years ago, and I've just found it. (It's true that
I got the bit about Anne's Family wrong; the object of derision
being Anne herself. I wonder if she would have appreciated
the difference much...) As for Bruce, he gave false oaths
of fealty to Edward I (and a *claim* might be made that his
distaste for John Balliol having preceded him to the throne
gave him personal reason to do so - but there's nothing to
support this notion); if one imagines him entering the Lion's
Den to bend the knee in London with the Red Comyn, and
then dealing with the latter's betrayal, when all along he had
the intention of liberating Scotland, the claim the he "changed
sides" like Bobbing John did in later years is quite insulting.
Viewing Bruce's history as a whole gives a clear picture of
a man with a Clear Picture; the twists and turns he was
compelled to take in achieving it do not, in any sane mind
at least, constitute "betrayal."
Hystorically,
The Phantom Piper
Allan
On Jun 28, 10:46 am, Jane Margaret Laight <jml27...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> Macduff, who was untimely ripped from his mother's womb,
> did the actual dirty work in taking out Macbeth.
I knew I had read something like this from
Nigel Tranter years ago, and I've just found it.
************************
You do know that Nigel Tranter is an author of historical novels and not a
historian don't you?
Allan
Jane Margaret Laight
wrote:
Thanks for the history lesson, I guess--I'll have to look at that
Nigel Tranter reference, but it is my understanding (and I'm going on
pure memory now) that Anne of Denmark wasn't the sharpest arrow in the
quiver, and if any reference to her being Lady Macbeth would have been
more for the King's benefit as it may've gone completely over her
head. However, can that connotation carried further? Even assuming
that Anne picked up on it and actually was the "ambitious" type, for
whom would her ambitions have been for? The Prince of Wales, Henry
Frederick Stuart? (who was evidently everything his father wasn't) I
have to remember if Jamie was jealous or in some way disparaging of
his son--but this is just speculation.
However, I suspect that Shakespeare's fans went to see "Macbeth" the
same way that some folks went to see "Braveheart"--pure entertainment
cloaked with a veneer of history. A perfect example in contemporary
movie lore are the two movies of western lawman Wyatt Earp--Kevin
Costner's study is well-made, exquisitely detailed, well-acted,
largely accurate and a good movie to view. However, Kurt Russell's
"Tombstone" was described as "the way it should have been"--although
nearly everything in it is inaccurate (or flat-out wrong, in the way
Hollywood used to make their historical pictures), many folks consider
it the "better" movie, and I thoroughly enjoy it everytime it comes
on. I suspect that there were enough folks in the audience that knew
that Shakespeare's history (or Holinshead's) was (to be charitable)
faulty--but if they were going for a history lesson, they probably
would have not gone to see "Macbeth". I suspect if there were members
of an Elizabethan SPCA, they wouldn't have gone to the bear-baitings,
either.
JML
don't get yr knickers in a twist, now, dearie
Allan
"Fred J. McCall" <fjmc...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:mote455b09mhi05pc...@4ax.com...
> The Phantom Piper <ThePhan...@comcast.net> wrote:
>
> :On Jun 28, 3:12 am, Fred J. McCall <fjmcc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> :>
> :> Ah, but can you really trust an Englishman or a Bruce?
> :
> :And why wouldn't one be able to Trust a Bruce?
> :
> :Obviously, you get your Scottish 'History' from
> :Master Mel's 'Bravefart'.
>
> And obviously you still haven't managed to pull your head out of your
> ass.
Now Fred you are obviously going to have to go out and buy a few Nigel
Tranter novels so you can catch up :-) Or better still get his "History of
Scotland". That is the one where he writes in the preface something like "I
am not a historian and this is not an attempt to write a history of
Scotland". I have the book down in the office so will get an exact quote
tomorrow. Mind it is a step up from citing biscuit tins - or refusing to
cite anything at all. In the meantime I am off to read some Walter Scott to
see what really happened.
Allan
The Phantom Piper
>
> ...I'm going on pure memory now...
(Dangerous, that, as I've just [re]discovered!)
> Anne of Denmark wasn't the sharpest arrow in the quiver,
> and if any reference to her being Lady Macbeth would have
> been more for the King's benefit as it may've gone completely
> over her head.
I think it would be rather for his and his friends', er - "benefit..."
> However, can that connotation carried further? Even assuming
> that Anne picked up on it and actually was the "ambitious" type,
> for whom would her ambitions have been for?
No, Tranter - writing in work of _Non-Fiction_, as the
_esteemed historical scholar he was_ - was making
the case that James wanted Propaganda; he got in
some Good PR for his ancestor Duncan, worked in
an entirely fictitious Stuart connection with the ancient
Celtic Monarchy via Banquo, and delivered a dollop of
hate in the person of 'Lady MacBeth' as a caricature
on Regal Women in general and his wife in particular.
> However, I suspect that Shakespeare's fans went to see
> "Macbeth" the same way that some folks went to see
> "Braveheart"--pure entertainment cloaked with a veneer
> of history.
And - just as with 'Bravefart' - I'm *quite* certain that it
was taken as God's Honest Historical Fact by quite a
large percentage of the audience.
> However, Kurt Russell's "Tombstone"
Is that the one with Val Kilmer as Doc Holiday?
> was described as "the way it should have been"--although
> nearly everything in it is inaccurate (or flat-out wrong, in the
> way Hollywood used to make their historical pictures),
"Used to?!"
> don't get yr knickers in a twist, now, dearie
I'm shocked - *shocked* I say - and appalled that
you would think such a thing possible of me! I'm
as mellow as Peach Pie, I am - with creme topping.
I'm as mellow as a gentle Spring breeze on a clear
<buying this, yet?> day in May...
Carrying On,
The Phantom Piper
The Phantom Piper
with absolutely *no* credentials whatsoever, save for
being lying Highland-hating Britclone revisionist Scum.
(~Not!~)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nigel_Tranter#The_historian
An excerpt:
Initially intrigued by their architectural history,
Tranter soon developed an interest in Scottish
history generally. As he moved into historical
novels, his research became deeper until he had
amassed vast knowledge of Scotland's history
to a very detailed level.
A list of his Non-Fiction works:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nigel_Tranter#Non-fiction_books
Some of his awards and honours:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nigel_Tranter#Awards_and_honours
As opposed - (the Above) - to the Fiction posted here
as Fact by persons whose only credentials are the ability
to slander dead scholars of eminent renown and to put a
wide audience to sleep in but two paragraphs (if, that is,
one can *find* a Paragraph in the thick morass of one of
their droning punctuationless rants), and to whom the
word "honours" is as foreign as it's root.
Clearing Things Up,
The Phantom Piper
Allan
On Jun 28, 12:17 pm, Jane Margaret Laight <jml27...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> ...I'm going on pure memory now...
(Dangerous, that, as I've just [re]discovered!)
> Anne of Denmark wasn't the sharpest arrow in the quiver,
> and if any reference to her being Lady Macbeth would have
> been more for the King's benefit as it may've gone completely
> over her head.
I think it would be rather for his and his friends', er - "benefit..."
> However, can that connotation carried further? Even assuming
> that Anne picked up on it and actually was the "ambitious" type,
> for whom would her ambitions have been for?
No, Tranter - writing in work of _Non-Fiction_, as the
_esteemed historical scholar he was_ -
*****************************
This is getting daft. He wasn't an "esteemed historical scholar". He had no
qualification in history at further education and in fact didn't even go to
further education as far as I know. So he wasn't really a scholar and was
only a historian in the way he was, as many other people are, deeply
interested in it. He also had a deep interest in castles and went straight
from school to start an apprenticeship as an architect but that didn't work
out so he worked for an accountancy firm before joining the army. Again read
his own intro to his non-fiction Story Of Scotland and he openly says he is
no historian and isn't attempting to write a history. He wrote many
historical novels but that is a completely different thing from being an
esteemed historical scholar. It is neither better or worse - just a
different thing.
Allan
Allan
"The Phantom Piper" <ThePhan...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:c345e9f6-e0b2-4d5d...@c36g2000yqn.googlegroups.com...
> Whereas I prefer to get my History from a droning hack
> with absolutely *no* credentials whatsoever, save for
> being lying Highland-hating Britclone revisionist Scum.
>
> (~Not!~)
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nigel_Tranter#The_historian
>
> An excerpt:
>
> Initially intrigued by their architectural history,
> Tranter soon developed an interest in Scottish
> history generally. As he moved into historical
> novels, his research became deeper until he had
> amassed vast knowledge of Scotland's history
> to a very detailed level.
>
> A list of his Non-Fiction works:
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nigel_Tranter#Non-fiction_books
>
> Some of his awards and honours:
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nigel_Tranter#Awards_and_honours
>
> As opposed - (the Above) - to the Fiction posted here
> as Fact by persons whose only credentials are the ability
> to slander dead scholars of eminent renown
This is absolute crap.How on earth am I slandering him you bloody buffoon?
He was a novelist. He wrote historical novels - and no doubt he was very
good at it. He brought Scottish history to a lot of people and was amply
acknowledged for doing so,but that is not what you said. You said he was an
'esteemed historical scholar', which suggests that he was an actual
historian having trained and studied in history. That is simply not true.
Likewise I repeat - read his own words at the start of his non-fiction Story
Of Scotland. He openly states that he is not a historian and isn't trying to
write a history. Sure being a keen amateur history buff he would have an
overall good knowldege of history but the said work is him writing a story -
ie the story of Scotland. Fine as a popular history to get people interested
or give them a basic grounding which I'm sure was his thinking, but as a
piece of writing it is more in league with Walter Scott's "Tales Of A
Grand-Father" history book than it is with ample of more seriously
researched histories written by real historians.
Question. Would I be slandering Elvis if I suggested he wasn't a great
song-writer? Would that mean I didn't think he could sing?
Allan
The Highlander
> http://scotlandonsunday.scotsman.com/scotland/Dead-men-didn39t-wear-p...
>
> The yellow shirts are coming, doesn't really suit our image, does it?
>
> Neb
Just stopped in to see if the group is still here.
I hope you read my remarks on the subject of lèine cròich, Neb!
Lèine cròich was standard wear in Ireland in its day and as it was the
dress of a warrior, the Highlanders also wore it as there was a
substantial trade between Ireland and the Highlands in those days; a
connection which still exists today in the form of cultural contacts
between Ireland the Highlands.
For those interested in the preservation of Scotland's heritage, my
family has decided to go ahead with the restoration of Balnakiel
House, former home of the Chiefs of Clan McKay and a superb example of
17th century Highland architecture. The house was built on top of the
remains of an earlier summer palace of the Bishops of Caithness. My
great-grandfather bought it in the 1800s and it should not be confused
with Balnakiel House in Galashiels.
The Phantom Piper
>
> Just stopped in to see if the group is still here.
Welcome back! We've wondered what Dark Shed
you've been holed up in as one of your legendary
snits slowly dissipated, like some Thundercloud
From Hell... It's been all I could do to keep the
Spirit Of SCS alive in your absence! Still, one tries...
Fred has missed you *terribly* (he is so Dependent,
you know); I've been feeding him his daily minimum
of Abuse while you were out, but really he's *your*
pet - well, he took quite a liking to Adam, didn't he
though? - and will no doubt respond to your loving
touch as only a good doggie can do.
As for Adam, we are presently speculating on his
whereabouts: some say that you murdered him
when he mistakenly stumbled upon your secret
underground Malt Bunker during a Walkabout he
undertook as a lark. Others (myself) have him
dancing naked around Sacred Fires in the Outback,
chanting to Uluru and blasted out of his mind on
Cane Toad Juice. But the smart money (as always)
is on the Drunk Tank. Or perhaps he drove his
gargantuan behemoth camper off a cliff and is now,
as Cory suggests, Swimming With The Stingrays...
JJJ is still on holiday for the next two weeks; Susan
Boyle has had her Fifteen Minutes, then; and THIS
JUST IN - BREAKING NEWS - MICHAEL JACKSON
*STILL* DEAD! UPDATES ON THE HOUR, EVERY
HOUR, FOREVER.
But, how have *you* been?
> For those interested in the preservation of Scotland's heritage,
> my family has decided to go ahead with the restoration of Balnakiel
> House, former home of the Chiefs of Clan McKay and a superb
> example of 17th century Highland architecture. The house was
> built on top of the remains of an earlier summer palace of the
> Bishops of Caithness. My great-grandfather bought it in the 1800s
> and it should not be confused with Balnakiel House in Galashiels.
Oh, well then, that's nice. Good work if you can
get it, I suppose. Is *this* the place?
http://image32.webshots.com/32/2/47/64/245024764XtIYSu_fs.jpg
How many Sheds does it boast? Where's the
liquor-cabinet? I see no battlements; where
do the Æthereal Musicians sleep?
Wandering About Touching Things,
The Phantom Piper
(*Whooops! Sorry about that; I barely touched it
and it just - *came off*! <sniff> It looks rather
Old and was no doubt quite brittle - oh well...)
Allan
> "Allan" <al...@noemail.co.uk> wrote:
>
> :
> :"Fred J. McCall" <fjmc...@gmail.com> wrote in message
> :news:mote455b09mhi05pc...@4ax.com...
> :> The Phantom Piper <ThePhan...@comcast.net> wrote:
> :>
> :> :On Jun 28, 3:12 am, Fred J. McCall <fjmcc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> :> :>
> :> :> Ah, but can you really trust an Englishman or a Bruce?
> :> :
> :> :And why wouldn't one be able to Trust a Bruce?
> :> :
> :> :Obviously, you get your Scottish 'History' from
> :> :Master Mel's 'Bravefart'.
> :> :
> :>
> :> And obviously you still haven't managed to pull your head out of your
> :> ass.
> :
> :Now Fred you are obviously going to have to go out and buy a few Nigel
> :Tranter novels so you can catch up :-) Or better still get his "History
> of
> :Scotland". That is the one where he writes in the preface something like
> "I
> :am not a historian and this is not an attempt to write a history of
> :Scotland".
> :
>
> seeking out more.
>
> :
> :I have the book down in the office so will get an exact quote
> :tomorrow. Mind it is a step up from citing biscuit tins - or refusing to
> :cite anything at all. In the meantime I am off to read some Walter Scott
> to
> :see what really happened.
>
> He broke oaths several times, flipping back and forth between the
> English and the Scots.
Well of course it is well known and for Piper to suggest otherwise is
typically daft. The great story about Bruce is his moving from the initial
working for his family's interest (which of course was not unusual in the
least) and his hesitancy in permanently committing to the national cause, to
his committing and sacrificing amost everything, to his great comeback and
eventual victory.
Allan
Nebulous
"The Highlander" <mic...@shaw.ca> wrote in message
news:b828acfb-10be-4673...@x5g2000yqk.googlegroups.com...
On Jun 28, 1:36 am, "Nebulous" <jw...@pigtail.com> wrote:
> http://scotlandonsunday.scotsman.com/scotland/Dead-men-didn39t-wear-p...
>
> The yellow shirts are coming, doesn't really suit our image, does it?
>
> Neb
Just stopped in to see if the group is still here.
I hope you read my remarks on the subject of l�ine cr�ich, Neb!
L�ine cr�ich was standard wear in Ireland in its day and as it was the
dress of a warrior, the Highlanders also wore it as there was a
substantial trade between Ireland and the Highlands in those days; a
connection which still exists today in the form of cultural contacts
between Ireland the Highlands.
For those interested in the preservation of Scotland's heritage, my
family has decided to go ahead with the restoration of Balnakiel
House, former home of the Chiefs of Clan McKay and a superb example of
17th century Highland architecture. The house was built on top of the
remains of an earlier summer palace of the Bishops of Caithness. My
great-grandfather bought it in the 1800s and it should not be confused
with Balnakiel House in Galashiels.
***********************************************************
Hi Mike
good to see you. We're still here, as always, though a bit light in
numbers.Glad to hear about the restoration. It will provide some employment
in a recession. Someday I need to get that far North and see it for myself.
Neb
S Viemeister
> For those interested in the preservation of Scotland's heritage, my
> family has decided to go ahead with the restoration of Balnakiel
> House, former home of the Chiefs of Clan McKay and a superb example of
> 17th century Highland architecture. The house was built on top of the
> remains of an earlier summer palace of the Bishops of Caithness. My
> great-grandfather bought it in the 1800s and it should not be confused
> with Balnakiel House in Galashiels.
Excellent news.
The Phantom Piper
>
> He broke oaths several times
Utterly meaningless Oaths, given under the implicit
or explicit threat of imprisonment, exile, or death.
Tell me, Fred, were the statements made by oh, say,
John McCain in Hanoi, or the American pilots in Gulf
War I in Iraq, binding statements of True Intent?
Because if they were not, you've just demonstrated
_once again_ that you are an utter fool or a pernicious
liar or (more likely) both.
> flipping back and forth between the English and the Scots.
Incorrect. But you'll claim worse (in order to nail down
your Ignorant Idiot Credentials beyond all doubt) in a
moment:
> Then there's what at least one source describes as
> "the perfidious, but crafty Bruce" murdering John Comyn
> in a church, of all places, earning him excommunication
> by the Pope.
And there it *is*. What you don't realise (and I do at
least believe that you are genuinely ignorant of these
facts, and not deliberately trying to revise history in
order to muddy the waters and prove your non-point)
is that Comyn and Bruce had made a Pact. The Pact
was that they would divide the Kingship of Scotland
between them, one of them taking the Political title,
with all the Risk and Danger associated with that, and
the other would take the Land Claims, with all the rights
and income associated with *that*. Their theory was
that if both sets of powers resided in one person, it was
only a matter of time before Edward did away with that
person and snatched all authority for himself. It was
also a way for them to divide the Guardianship which
had been Wallace's without immediately going to war
with each other, in the middle of a terrible time for their
homeland. Bruce played the Long Game, deliberately
allowing the Red Comyn to have the supposed Prize
of the Crown Lands, and taking upon himself the title
of King, thus making himself an instant Target in the
eyes of Edward Longshanks. He thought that he could
rely upon the Comyn's self-interest to keep the pact
intact long enough for him to solidify power and use
the title and position to ready Scotland for the inevitable
war with England. However, he did not count upon the
Comyn *immediately running to betray him to Edward*,
telling the English monarch that Bruce was laying claim
to the title King Of Scots and planning insurrection.
It was *this* that Bruce confronted Comyn about at the
church of the Minorites at Dumfries. When the Comyn
*laughed* at Bruce's accusations, they came to blows
and Bruce drew his dirk and struck the Comyn down.
(This is where the famous scene took place where Bruce,
stricken with the seriousness of the act, rushed outside
exclaiming, "I fear I have slain the Comyn!" causing his
companion Kirkpatrick of Closeburn to remark, "'Feared'
you say? I will go and mak siccar!" and to draw his own
dagger and rush into the church to finish off the wounded
Comyn. The motto of the Kirkpatrick's has been "I Mak
Siccar" [that's "I Make Certain" or "I Make Sure," for you,
Fred] ever since.)
So it is *not*, as you have chosen to post:
> "the perfidious, but crafty Bruce" murdering John Comyn
> in a church
by any means, you vile bastard. And don't think you
can get out of this one by claiming that "it wasn't me
that said it" - if indeed that biased Spin came from
this page:
> http://www.britannia.com/bios/robertbruce.html
you have only to look at the Title of the Link.
"Britannia"-dot-com, eh? Just WHERE THE
HELL DO YOU THINK YOU ARE, BOY? To
post such obvious shite in a Scottish newsgroup!
Why, you're no better than that arse Cheney,
who sold out an ongoing Critical Operation at
the CYA in order to score a Political Point for
himself!
You might as well pack it in here, scumbag;
you have _zero_ reason for hanging about
here anymore.
Oh - and by the way, it's nice that you and the
Stalking Midge could find so much to agree upon
and get on so well together. You were meant for
each other. Birds Of A Feather, indeed...
Disgusted, But Not Surprised,
The Phantom Piper
Allan
"The Phantom Piper" <ThePhan...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:c345e9f6-e0b2-4d5d...@c36g2000yqn.googlegroups.com...
> As opposed - (the Above) - to the Fiction posted here
> as Fact by persons whose only credentials are the ability
> to slander dead scholars of eminent renown and to put a
> wide audience to sleep in but two paragraphs (if, that is,
> one can *find* a Paragraph in the thick morass of one of
> their droning punctuationless rants), and to whom the
> word "honours" is as foreign as it's root.
>
>
> Clearing Things Up,
Now again what did you say? You claimed that Tranter was an "esteemed
historical scholar" which to my mind reads that he had actually studied
history at some level, had some degree of qualifications, and was respected
as such by his peers in that field. Well that is simply not true. As I
previously stated he left school to enter architecture but ended up working
for an accountancy firm before joining the army. Tranter doesn't even claim
to be a qualified historian - so my pointing out the fact that he isn't an
"esteemed scholarly historian" is hardly slandering him. Rather you used a
quote from one of his books (by the way he gives no citation for many of his
various theories including the one about James writing Macbeth) and rather
than saying something like "Nigel Tranter suggests one theory
is.............." you try and dress it up by claiming he is a scholarly
historian presenting accepted fact. Don't you think that is just a tad
wrong? That is not a kick at Tranter who, as I said, doesn't even claim to
be a historian. He was a novelist who's books, though not my cup of tea,
were loved by millions. His architectural books are held in high esteem as
are his travel guides. His volume "Story Of Scotland" though is more in line
with Walter Scott's history book than a really serious look at Scottish
history. Basically both Scott's and Tranter's are story books around their
views of Scottish history. Yes it is a good read but it is full of holes (ie
in that he doesn't back up many things with any kind of citation) and
especially in the first chapter there is much that would be thought of as
bunkim by most Scottish historians. But like I said it is a story book
rather than a history book anyway. Read the first line or so of the preface
written by Tranter.......................
"Let there be no mistake about this - I am not setting out to write a
history book. For one thing, I am not a qualified historian - only a story
teller with an interest in history"
Allan
Alan Smaill
> As opposed - (the Above) - to the Fiction posted here
> as Fact by persons whose only credentials are the ability
> to slander dead scholars of eminent renown and to put a
> wide audience to sleep in but two paragraphs (if, that is,
> one can *find* a Paragraph in the thick morass of one of
> their droning punctuationless rants), and to whom the
> word "honours" is as foreign as it's root.
ZZZZzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
did someone say something?
> Clearing Things Up,
>
> The Phantom Piper
--
Alan Smaill
The Phantom Piper
>
> did someone say something?
No, not for Five Days now, in this thread.
Until You Came Along...,
The Phantom Piper