Ida and Ela [was: countess Ida, etc.]
Nathaniel Taylor
Vickie,
Your thoughtful comments on Ida and Ela have helped save the discussion of
countess Ida from being completely content-free.
I've never looked myself at the Bradenstoke Priory charter that I cited
for you so long ago, but I know no reason to doubt Charles Evans' expert
statement (in _The Genealogist_ 3 (1982), 265-266) that it was indeed
from the 'first' William Longsword (or rather the second, since the
nickname was also used by or applied to a tenth-century ancestor of the
Conqueror). Bradenstoke, an Augustinian priory in northern Wiltshire, was
patronized by the early earls of Salisbury. I'll try to look at it later
this week when I'm at school, to add a few more bars to this little fugue.
As for the possibility that Ida and Ela might be equivalent: The use of
more than one name for the same medieval aristocratic woman is documented
on a few occasions, but this doesn't necessarily mean that the names in
question are variants of one another. Ida and Adalheidis are both
Germanic names with distinct roots; Ida is attested as a distinct Germanic
name very early. The name Alice and variants are, as you said,
derivatives of the name Adalheidis, though I think Ela is distinct from
Alice or Alix. William Longsword's wife Ela (Countess of Salisbury) is
also called Isabel in the CP, which *may* mean that Ela is a derivative of
Isabel, which is the early continental version of the Hebrew-derived
Elisabeth, and thus may represent a completely distinct name and language
group from Adalaidis or Ida.
These names (except Ela) are all listed in the _Oxford Dictionary of
Christian Names_, ed. Elizabeth Gidley Withycombe (Oxford, 1977), which is
quite a good reference work, analyzing roots and also citing early uses of
each name in a corpus of early documentary sources.
[A companion volume (not useful here but otherwise a fine reference, which
could be used to answer MANY of the queries appearing on s.g.m) is _A
Dictionary of Surnames_, ed. Patrick Hanks and Flavia Hodges (Oxford,
1988). I wish I had both of them on my own reference shelf.]
Naming variants can have serious consequences for genealogists. My
ggggfather Lazarus Lane was also known as 'Lara Lane', and was made into
two separate people (Lazarus and Lara), with distinct pairs of parents, by
one nineteenth-century genealogist. Though he's not wholly to blame
because the two pairs of parents are also named in Lazarus/Lara's
municipal birth and death records (though that's another story...).
Nat Taylor
Todd A. Farmerie
Nathaniel Taylor wrote:
> I've never looked myself at the Bradenstoke Priory charter that I cited
> for you so long ago, but I know no reason to doubt Charles Evans' expert
> statement (in _The Genealogist_ 3 (1982), 265-266) that it was indeed
> from the 'first' William Longsword (or rather the second, since the
> nickname was also used by or applied to a tenth-century ancestor of the
> Conqueror).
Actually, the third. The name was also used by/for Henry II's brother
William, but based on the analysis in Sheppard's article on the bastards
of H II, he had died before the illegitimate son William was born. It
is also suggested (I think in Adrian Ayles' monograph on the early
development of the English royal arms) that this brother of Henry also
bore the six gold lions on blue thought to have been used by Geoffrey
Plantagenet and later used by William Longespee Earl of Salisbury (as
seen on his seal and his tomb in Salisbury Cathedral).
taf
D. Spencer Hines
Nathaniel Taylor wrote:
>
>
> I've never looked myself at the Bradenstoke Priory charter that I cited
Delightful! A man with a whiff of honesty and candor.
Perhaps it IS time that some one of us actually read the ruddy
thing----rather than just use it as an authority rattle and talisman in
the "Countess Ida" discusssion.
Godspeed.
--
D. Spencer Hines---"There is a passion for hunting something deeply
implanted in the human breast." Charles Dickens (1812-1870) "Oliver
Twist" (1837-1838) Chapter 10
D. Spencer Hines
Nathaniel Taylor wrote:
>
> I've never looked myself at the Bradenstoke Priory charter that I cited
> for you so long ago,... <snip> Bradenstoke, an Augustinian priory in northern Wiltshire, was
> patronized by the early earls of Salisbury.
I had asked which Holy Order three times and did not receive an answer.
Thanks. The Augustinians were hardly "obscure"---as had previously been
put forward.
> I'll try to look at it later this week when I'm at school, to add a few more bars to this little fugue.
Sterling. I'm sure you appreciate the reality that most of us do not
have access to this supposed "standard Medieval Genealogical" source.
Bob Leutner
Actually, Spence, many of us at or near university libraries
DO have access to said source, one of many British county-
historical serials of use to genealogists though not
"genealogical" serials per se.
That does not mean, however, that any of us is particularly
obliged to Xerox and distribute, or scan onto a web page,
everything we happen to have access to that isn't available at
your local public library or B. Dalton. That may be something
that 21st C. genealogists will do routinely -- incorporate
original source documents as hypertext things to click on,
rather than just cite them as we do now, relying on readers
either to trust us or find the things themselves to check --
but it can't happen quite yet for reasons that to enumerate
would now be drifting WAY away from topicality in this
newsgroup.
My ii denarii.
Bob Leutner
Iowa City IA
----------------------------------------------------------
"Trust, but verify."
William Addams Reitwiesner
In article <3313C1...@worldnet.att.net>,
"D. Spencer Hines" <shi...@worldnet.att.net> writes:
>Nathaniel Taylor wrote:
>>
>> I've never looked myself at the Bradenstoke Priory charter that I cited
>> for you so long ago, ...
>
>Delightful! A man with a whiff of honesty and candor.
>
>Perhaps it IS time that some one of us actually read the ruddy
>thing----rather than just use it as an authority rattle and talisman in
>the "Countess Ida" discusssion.
Hey, Spence, I've got an idea: why don't *you* tell us what it says.
Or is actually doing research beneath you?
I have here in my hand a list (oops, wrong speech) of 47 libraries which
have the (published) Bradenstoke Priory charter. One of these 47 may
well be in your neighborhood. If not, your friendly neighborhood
librarian will probably have heard of something called "Interlibrary
Loan". The item you should look for is "The Cartulary of Bradenstoke
Priory", and the editor is Vera C. M. London. It was published in
Devizes in 1979 as volume 35 of the "Wiltshire Record Society" series,
though it's cataloged as a monograph. The OCLC record number for it
is 2176-0066, and the ISBN is 0-901333-12-3.
You see, Spence, those of us who are your betters consider you to be a
petulant brat whose volume level exceeds his abilities. Perhaps if
you show us that you have even a glimmer of knowledge of what you're
criticising, you can redeem yourself in our eyes. Or perhaps not.
As always, if you have any complaints about the research support I
provide, or my attitude, or the color of my socks, you should contact
the soc.genealogy.medieval (or GEN-MEDIEVAL, if you prefer) management
for a refund.
William Addams Reitwiesner
wr...@loc.gov
Todd A. Farmerie
D. Spencer Hines wrote:
>
> Nathaniel Taylor wrote:
> >
>
> > I've never looked myself at the Bradenstoke Priory charter that I cited
> > patronized by the early earls of Salisbury.
>
> I had asked which Holy Order three times and did not receive an answer.
> Thanks. The Augustinians were hardly "obscure"---as had previously been
> put forward.
Only you called the order obscure (or mentioned any Holy Order at all).
You are twisting facts. I called the monastery (the priory) obscure.
Try to be more accurate.
> > I'll try to look at it later this week when I'm at school, to add a few more bars to this little fugue.
>
> Sterling. I'm sure you appreciate the reality that most of us do not
> have access to this supposed "standard Medieval Genealogical" source.
>
One of the tools of 21st century genealogy is the Interlibrary Loan
Department at your local library. The vast majority of publications
anywhere in the country can be obtained by any patron, anywhere. You
should make yourself familiar with this tool. You would learn that you
DO have access to this and most other 'supposed' standard Medieval
Genealogical sources.
taf
D. Spencer Hines
Todd A. Farmerie wrote:
> Only you called the order obscure (or mentioned any Holy Order at all).
> You are twisting facts. I called the monastery (the priory) obscure.
> Try to be more accurate.
Horsefeathers. You refused to name the Holy Order. Perhaps because you
did not know it. I'm beginning to wonder if YOU have read this "Magic
Charter" that folks seem to love to cite, but confess they have not read
yet. Such tactics do not inspire confidence. You are doing some furious
back-pedalling behind the scenery.
>
> > > I'll try to look at it later this week when I'm at school, to add a few more bars to this little fugue.
> >
> > Sterling. I'm sure you appreciate the reality that most of us do not
> > have access to this supposed "standard Medieval Genealogical" source.
> >
>
> One of the tools of 21st century genealogy is the Interlibrary Loan
> Department at your local library. The vast majority of publications
> anywhere in the country can be obtained by any patron, anywhere. You
> should make yourself familiar with this tool. You would learn that you
> DO have access to this and most other 'supposed' standard Medieval
> Genealogical sources.
I do not either require or desire a research tutorial from you.
Inter-Library Loans often take three to four months to get from the
Mainland to Honolulu. I have several on order now.
Let the sdvocate show his wares. Either climb----and show us the
document---or get off the ladder so someone else with more intelligence,
scholarly integrity and will-power can.
Where you stand, usually depends on where you sit. If you are near a
major University or National Library you may well have access to many
key sources that others do not. Just because we don't have these
esoteric sources does not mean we are proscribed from practicing
Medieval Genealogy----as William Reitweisener seems to think. One needs
to be sensitive to that factor and take it into account.
I repeat, if you are making a full-court press that "Countess Ida" was
William Longspee's/William de Longspee's/William Longsword's
Mother---and you don't want anyone to challenge you on that point---then
you need to show some hard evidence, and the logic to back it up, and
prove your case---or get off the ladder.
D. Spencer Hines
William Addams Reitwiesner wrote:
>
> In article <3313C1...@worldnet.att.net>,
> "D. Spencer Hines" <shi...@worldnet.att.net> writes:
>
> >>
> >> I've never looked myself at the Bradenstoke Priory charter that I cited
Very short on substance and long on abusive rhetoric---apparently one of
your specialties. Not very eloquent or polished-----not even a good
rant---rather pedestrian and certainly without elan, politesse or savoir
faire.
William, perhaps you have immersed yourself in Medieval Genealogy too
long. This sort of thing happens to Historians too, particularly the
Medievalists. They study Kings and Queens and Dukes and Counts and Earls
and Popes and Emperors so long-----they sometimes feel they have become
one, and behave accordingly.
Time for a Reality Check.
D. Spencer Hines
Nathaniel Taylor wrote:
>
<snip>
Thank you kindly, Nat. It's amazing what the injection of some actual
fact, evidence and logic---into a warmly debated discussion---can do to
clear the air. Perhaps the folks doing the authority rattling had not
read the actual charters either---only the calendar of abstracts----or
perhaps not even those.
> I see no reason not to widen the net to include such women, and that is
> obviously what Douglas Richardson has done in selecting Ida, wife of Roger
> Bigod, earl of Norfolk, as the true mother. Of course, I imagine he has
> other evidence to persuade his readers of this selection.
It will be most interesting critically to read this imagined
corroborative evidence and not just depend on William's own
unsubstantiated words on the matter.
> I look forward
> to reading Mr. Richardson's study of the identity of William's mother when
> it is finished and published.
So do I. But, it appears from previous posts, that Douglas Richardson
has it on the back burner at present.
Erin Bradford
I'm am a college student in Montana with no access to any books about
medieval genealogy either at the university library or the public library
Erin Bradford
ks...@montana.campus.mci.net
At 11:52 AM 2/26/97 -0600, you wrote:
>Actually, Spence, many of us at or near university libraries
>DO have access to said source, one of many British county-
>historical serials of use to genealogists though not
>"genealogical" serials per se.
>
>That does not mean, however, that any of us is particularly
>obliged to Xerox and distribute, or scan onto a web page,
>everything we happen to have access to that isn't available at
>your local public library or B. Dalton. That may be something
>that 21st C. genealogists will do routinely -- incorporate
>original source documents as hypertext things to click on,
>rather than just cite them as we do now, relying on readers
>either to trust us or find the things themselves to check --
>but it can't happen quite yet for reasons that to enumerate
>would now be drifting WAY away from topicality in this
>newsgroup.
>
>My ii denarii.
>
>Bob Leutner
>Iowa City IA
>----------------------------------------------------------
>"Trust, but verify."
>
>
>
>On Wed, 26 Feb 1997, D. Spencer Hines wrote:
>
Nathaniel Taylor
In article <ntaylor-2502...@cis-ts4-slip7.cis.brown.edu>, I wrote:
> I'll try to look at it later this week when I'm at school,
> to add a few more bars to this little fugue.
Surprise! The published edition of the Bradenstoke priory charters
(Cartulary of Bradenstoke Priory, ed. Vera C. M. London; Wilts. Rec. Soc.,
35; Devizes, 1979) is actually a calendar of abstracts, not a full text
edition. Those of you who still insist on reading the original charters
must, alas, do it in the British Library.
There are two charters attesting William Longespee's maternity, one
appearing in each of the fragmentary extant Bradenstoke cartularies (both
fourteenth-century MSS): BL Cotton Vitellius A.11, f. 102 (no. 646 in the
pub. vol.) and BL Stowe 925, f. 143 (no. 481).
Of course, the abstracts, plus the original Latin phrases quoted in the
introduction to the edition (and that portion of the introduction quoted
in toto by Charles Evans in his letter to The Genealogist, 3 (1982),
265-6), tell you everything you need to know relevant to this question:
William stated that a countess Ida was his mother in two (undated) gifts
to the priory designed for her spiritual benefit.
In answer to Vickie Elam White's query as to whether it is certain that it
is the first William Longespee who is the author of the charters in
question, that is shown by charter no. 481, in which the gift is made by
William for the souls of both his wife Ela and his mother countess Ida.
Note that this means that Ida was not necessarily dead at the time of the
donations, since Ela wasn't (Ela outlived him by over thirty years).
The editor of the cartulary tentatively suggested Ida, suo jure countess
of Boulogne, as a possible candidate for the mother. Evans went further
and said that he knew of no other contemporary candidate. The flaw in
this is that Evans was looking only at those countesses suo jure, that is,
heiresses of earldoms or of continental counties. My own experience is
limited to continental charters in this period, but there the use of
'comitissa' for the consort of a count was a long-established protocol, so
I see no reason not to widen the net to include such women, and that is
obviously what Douglas Richardson has done in selecting Ida, wife of Roger
Bigod, earl of Norfolk, as the true mother. Of course, I imagine he has
other evidence to persuade his readers of this selection. I look forward
to reading Mr. Richardson's study of the identity of William's mother when
it is finished and published.
Nat Taylor
Todd A. Farmerie
Todd A. Farmerie wrote:
>
> Nathaniel Taylor wrote:
>
> > I've never looked myself at the Bradenstoke Priory charter that I cited
> > statement (in _The Genealogist_ 3 (1982), 265-266) that it was indeed
> > from the 'first' William Longsword (or rather the second, since the
> > nickname was also used by or applied to a tenth-century ancestor of the
> > Conqueror).
>
> Actually, the third. The name was also used by/for Henry II's brother
> William, but based on the analysis in Sheppard's article on the bastards
> of H II, he had died before the illegitimate son William was born.
He is also known as William Fitz Empress
> It
> is also suggested (I think in Adrian Ayles' monograph on the early
> development of the English royal arms) that this brother of Henry also
> bore the six gold lions on blue thought to have been used by Geoffrey
> Plantagenet and later used by William Longespee Earl of Salisbury (as
> seen on his seal and his tomb in Salisbury Cathedral).
I took another look at Ayles, and my statement here is wrong. William
Fitz Empress used a single lion rampant on his seal.
taf
Vickie (Elam) White
D. Spencer Hines wrote, quoting me --
>>Thanks. It's difficult making myself heard all the way to Hawaii. Guess I'll
just
>>have to speak up a bit louder. That must be the reason why Spencer hasn't
heard what
>>I've been trying to say. He urges us to be advocates, yet he won't let us
develop
>>any theories or hold discussions. I can't be the only person on the list who
likes
>>to think out loud and exchange ideas with others.
>
>This is a bum rap. I sent you a congratulatory message applauding your
speculations
>concerning the identity of "Countess Ida."
>
>Perhaps it was a non-delivery.
Actually, I meant every word. You+ can't throw barbs and accusations in all
directions, then throw your+ hands up and say "I don't want to play anymore,
guys!" if
we aren't dumbstruck at the obvious brilliance (at least to you+) of your+
rhetoric.
The "poor misunderstood Spencer" routine just doesn't cut it. As we said as
kids, "you
can dish it out, but you can't take it."
>>I run the risk of finding out that all of my speculation above is pure
hogwash, but
>>that's a risk I'm willing to take. Nothing ventured, nothing gained.
>
>Quite right. As long as we realize it, when we are speculating and going beyond
any
>reasonable evidentiary base--we are doing what humans have to do when they do
>analytic thinking. We build plausible scenarios and then test them against the
known
>evidence---or ferret out new evidence that leads us into new scenario
formulation.
Well, what do you+ think we* have been trying to do? If you+ would think,
compose
your+ messages, think again, then edit, then send, you+ just might see that
others* on
this list may have some contributions to make.
I dunno, it might be a male thing, and I do detect a distinct whiff of a
testosterone
dump. I realize that you guys** are perfectly capable of looking out for
yourselves,
you** even seem to enjoy trading insults. However, you+ better bring it down
several
notches because you+ are defeating the purpose of this list. You+ are causing
an
inordinate number of readers to remain "lurkers. Why am I addressing this to
you+,
when other regulars also indulge in this kind of behavior? Simply because the
others
are usually acting in response to you.+ You+ are the ringleader, your+ roar is
the
loudest.
This list is not your private domain. If all you want is verbal sparring, I
suggest
you all take it to private email.
So Spencer, thanks for the faint praise. But it would mean a lot more if it was
coming from someone who seemed to want to engage in some honest dialog rather
than a
diatribe.
Since you had difficulty deciphering the message in which I referred to your
cronies, maybe this will help --
* I mean the 98% of the list who can't seem to
get a word in edgewise or who are loathe to post to the list because of all the
"bad
noise."
+ This means you, Spencer
** I think you all know who you are
Vickie (Elam) White
10265...@compuserve.com
D. Spencer Hines
At 09:34 PM 2/28/97 +0000, you wrote:
>
>So Spencer, thanks for the faint praise. But it would mean a lot more if
it was
>coming from someone who seemed to want to engage in some honest dialog
rather than a
>diatribe.
>
>Since you had difficulty deciphering the message in which I referred to your
>cronies, maybe this will help --
>
>* I mean the 98% of the list who can't seem to
>get a word in edgewise or who are loathe to post to the list because of
all the "bad
>noise."
>
>+ This means you, Spencer
>
>** I think you all know who you are
>
>Vickie (Elam) White
>10265...@compuserve.com
This, and the remainder of your emotional tirade, was deleted after a
cursory reading. The four "humours" definitely appear to be unbalanced again.
D. Spencer Hines----"City life breeds a mass mind 'hostile to reason,
shifty, irritable, credulous and violent', easy prey for conspiracy
theories and delusive promises of racist, imperialist or socialist
redemption." Robert Skidelsky, "The Road From Serfdom", Viking Penguin
(1996), p. 39
Melissa Mytinger
Spence, of course, never, ever has 'emotional tirades', does he?
Melissa Mytinger
Wally Jansen
In <3.0.1.16.1997022...@postoffice.worldnet.att.net> "D.
A tacky and oft repeated remark, and with a whiff of sexism.
You're just disgusting Hines.
-Wally
D. Spencer Hines
Wally Jansen wrote:
>>This, and the remainder of your emotional tirade, was deleted after a cursory reading. The four "humours" >definitely appear to be unbalanced again. [DSH]
>
> A tacky and oft repeated remark, and with a whiff of sexism.
>
> You're just disgusting Hines.
>
> -Wally
--
"I dunno, it might be a male thing, and I do detect a distinct whiff of
a testosterone dump."
[Vickie (Elam) White, 28 February 1997] [Referring to DSH]
Your "sexism" detector seems to be badly tuned and out of whack.
In Medieval Medicine, the four humours---phlegm, black bile, yellow bile
and blood---were not unique to the female of the species homo sapiens.
"Testosterone Dumps" occur only in the male of the species homo sapiens.
So, Vickie (Elam) White's tawdry [from Saint Audrey (Saint Etheldreda)
( -679) "Queen of Northumbria"] remark is decidedly sexist, while mine
is not. Males too can have an "imbalalace of the humours."---Methinks
thou dost have one raging now.
So, you stand corrected. You're Welcome.
Since you obviously need to do some remedial reading on Medieval
Medicine before you pop off on this subject again, here is an excellent,
classic and well-respected source, gratis:
J. Ilberg, "Aus Galens Praxis," Neue Jahrbucher fur das Klassische
Alterum, Geschichte und deutsche Litteratur und fur Padagogik 15:276-312
(1905).
This is perhaps the best treatment of the medical theories of Galen
[129-c.199]---who built on the medical foundations laid down by
Hippocrates. He was not only a physician---but a great philosopher. His
Theory of Medicine was the prevailing orthodoxy or "conventional wisdom"
in the Medieval Period. In 157, in Pergamum, Galen was chief physician
for the gladiators. Therefore, he was quite experienced in sports
medicine as well.
You do read German, don't you?
Todd A. Farmerie
Nathaniel Taylor wrote:
>
> My own experience is
> limited to continental charters in this period, but there the use of
> 'comitissa' for the consort of a count was a long-established protocol, so
> I see no reason not to widen the net to include such women, and that is
> obviously what Douglas Richardson has done in selecting Ida, wife of Roger
> Bigod, earl of Norfolk, as the true mother.
CP, under Norfolk, quotes a donation by her son Hugh Bigod which
specifically calls her "Countess Ida", so this is consistant with the
contemporary usage.
taf
D. Spencer Hines
At 03:33 AM 2/27/97 +0000, Nat Taylor wrote:
>
>Surprise! The published edition of the Bradenstoke priory charters
>(Cartulary of Bradenstoke Priory, ed. Vera C. M. London; Wilts. Rec. Soc.,
>35; Devizes, 1979) is actually a calendar of abstracts, not a full text
>edition. Those of you who still insist on reading the original charters
>must, alas, do it in the British Library.
"Well, I Do Declare. Land Sakes and Honest to Goshen! All those folks,
beginning with Mr. taf and Ms. Vickie (Elam) White were acting like they
had actually read this charter and it was God's Own Truth in Thunder and
Lightning. Just the day before, that William Addams Reitweisner, expert
genealogical fella was telling us:"
William Addams Reitweisner 26 Feb 1997 13:00
["I have here in my hand a list (oops, wrong speech) of 47 libraries which
have the (published) Bradenstoke Priory charter. One of these 47 may
well be in your neighborhood. If not, your friendly neighborhood
librarian will probably have heard of something called "Interlibrary
Loan". The item you should look for is "The Cartulary of Bradenstoke
Priory", and the editor is Vera C. M. London. It was published in
Devizes in 1979 as volume 35 of the "Wiltshire Record Society" series,
though it's cataloged as a monograph. The OCLC record number for it
is 2176-0066, and the ISBN is 0-901333-12-3."]
But, it wasn't the "published Bradenstoke Priory charter" after all, was
it? It was actually just a "calendar of abstracts"---not the published
version, in a secondary source, of the primary source, as Mr. Reitweisner
told us.
"Why, honey chile, I do declare, we all would just have gone off on a Wild
Goose Chase if we had followed that Bill Reitweisner's bad advice." [The
humorous touch evoking Senator Joseph McCarthy's machinations ["oops wrong
speech"] lends an additional bad odor to this citation---which turned out
to be precisely true.
"Chile, you are gettin' too big for your britches. Folks are goin' to start
callin' you a 'petulant brat'---and such like."
"As the nice man from Harvard, that Nat Taylor fella, has told us---we need
to go to the British Museum in London, England if we want to see this
"Bradenstoke Priory charter" document for ourselves."
"Well, do tell. You just have to watch these Genealogical Expert fellas
pretty close when they start a harumphing and a bleating about somebody
having 47 libraries to choose from for this "Brandenstoke Priory charter"
document----and it turns out there aren't 47---not even 7----just ONE---and
that ONE is way over there----in ENGLAND"
"Land sakes, chile. I think you broke the code."
>
>Of course, I imagine he [Douglas Richardson] has
>other evidence to persuade his readers of this selection. I look forward
>to reading Mr. Richardson's study of the identity of William's mother when
>it is finished and published.
>
>Nat Taylor
Yes, I imagine he *has* other evidence and I too look forward to reading
Douglas Richardson's carefully researched and written scholarly
article---about the reported Mother of William Longespee. [DSH]
["You see, Spence, those of us who are your betters consider you to be a
petulant brat whose volume level exceeds his abilities. Perhaps if
you show us that you have even a glimmer of knowledge of what you're
criticising, you can redeem yourself in our eyes. Or perhaps not."]
William Addams Reitweisner 26 Feb 1997
"For 'tis the sport to have the engineer
Hoist with his own petar."
William Shakespeare (1564-1616)
Hamlet, Prince of Denmark, Act III, Scene iv, line 206
D. Spencer Hines---"It may be said that, thanks to the 'clercs', humanity
did evil for two thousand years, but honored good. This contradiction was
an honor to the human species,and formed the rift whereby civilization
slipped into the world." "La Trahison des clercs" [The Treason of the
Intellectuals] (1927) Julien Benda (1867-1956)
Bob Leutner
I'm pleased to see that you have learned to spell 'petar,'
Spence. I hadn't wanted to say anything about that. Now you
might do an etymology of the word for us.
Keep us entertained. You add so little real content here, you
might as well concentrate on your forte.
On Sun, 2 Mar 1997, D. Spencer Hines wrote:
> At 03:33 AM 2/27/97 +0000, Nat Taylor wrote:
>
> >
> >Surprise! The published edition of the Bradenstoke priory charters
> >(Cartulary of Bradenstoke Priory, ed. Vera C. M. London; Wilts. Rec. Soc.,
> >35; Devizes, 1979) is actually a calendar of abstracts, not a full text
> >edition. Those of you who still insist on reading the original charters
> >must, alas, do it in the British Library.
>
> "Well, I Do Declare. Land Sakes and Honest to Goshen! All those folks,
> beginning with Mr. taf and Ms. Vickie (Elam) White were acting like they
> had actually read this charter and it was God's Own Truth in Thunder and
> Lightning. Just the day before, that William Addams Reitweisner, expert
> genealogical fella was telling us:"
>
*snip much 'honeychile' yadda yadda*
D. Spencer Hines
Bob Leutner wrote:
>
> I'm pleased to see that you have learned to spell 'petar,'
> Spence. I hadn't wanted to say anything about that. Now you
> might do an etymology of the word for us.
>
You might want to crack a dictionary before you pop off like this, or is
that beyond your abilities? Many editions of the Webster's New
Collegiate have "petard"---while many Hamlet texts [but far from all]
have "petar"---As to the etymology, I'll leave that up to you----I think
your post captures the foundational meaning very well.
What did it take you----perhaps 5 or 6 minutes to compose your little
squib?
--
Bob Leutner
Seems to me if you're quoting Shakespeare you should quote
him, not a modern dictionary.
5 or 6 minutes? Nah. I didn't have to look it up. I went to
Harvard.
;)
Bob
On Sun, 2 Mar 1997, D. Spencer Hines wrote:
Vickie (Elam) White
Wally Jensen wrote, quoting D. Spencer Hines, who was quoting me --
>>This, and the remainder of your emotional tirade, was deleted after a cursory
>>reading. The four "humours" definitely appear to be unbalanced again.
>
>A tacky and oft repeated remark, and with a whiff of sexism.
>
>You're just disgusting Hines.
's OK, Wally. I got my dig in with my crack about testosterone, although
I hate to lower myself to those levels.
I'm glad that I'm not the only one who caught sexism wafting on the
breeze. I'd am not one of those women who automatically assumes that
sexism is the root of all disagreements and problems she encounters, but
when I read several references to "humours" etc. I caught the scent. Thanks
for verifying it.
Vickie (Elam) White
10265...@compuserve.com
Digger
At 02:03 AM 3/3/97 EST, Vickie (Elam) White wrote:
>'s OK, Wally. I got my dig in with my crack about testosterone, although
>I hate to lower myself to those levels.
>
>I'm glad that I'm not the only one who caught sexism wafting on the
>breeze. I'd am not one of those women who automatically assumes that
>sexism is the root of all disagreements and problems she encounters, but
>when I read several references to "humours" etc. I caught the scent. Thanks
>for verifying it.
>
>Vickie (Elam) White
>10265...@compuserve.com
>
I agree. Personally, I consider it not sexism, but a complete lack of
character.
Can we please get on with research and just delete Hines' messages without
opening them as long as he insists on replying to everything without rhyme
or reason? (not directed at you personally Vickie, just using your msg.)
Karen K. HOGUE McCLARAN <mccl...@concentric.net>
Publisher of LEWIS LEGACY & COLLINS CONNECTIONS
~Digger~ #Genealogy_Digs on irc.eskimo.com
McClaran Genealogy Services
Digger's Joke and Trivia Factory
Tom Young
In article <1.5.4.32.1997030...@pop3.concentric.net> you wrote:
>Karen K. HOGUE McCLARAN <mccl...@concentric.net>
>Publisher of LEWIS LEGACY & COLLINS CONNECTIONS
>~Digger~ #Genealogy_Digs on irc.eskimo.com
>McClaran Genealogy Services
>Digger's Joke and Trivia Factory
Nothing to do with this thread, but seeing your name reminded me that you
were going to send the Limbaugh piece when finished. Any progress?
Tom (tey...@i1.net)
Wally Jansen
In <970303070301_102...@CompuServe.COM> "Vickie (Elam) White"
<10265...@COMPUSERVE.COM> writes:
>
>Wally Jensen wrote, quoting D. Spencer Hines, who was quoting me --
>
>>>This, and the remainder of your emotional tirade, was deleted after a cursory
>>>reading. The four "humours" definitely appear to be unbalanced again.
>>
>>A tacky and oft repeated remark, and with a whiff of sexism.
>>
>>You're just disgusting Hines.
>
>
>I hate to lower myself to those levels.
>
>I'm glad that I'm not the only one who caught sexism wafting on the
>breeze. I'd am not one of those women who automatically assumes that
>sexism is the root of all disagreements and problems she encounters,
but
>when I read several references to "humours" etc. I caught the scent.
Thanks
>for verifying it.
Considering that Hines' posts generally have a Vitorian era sense to
them (the exception being "Horsefeathers" which suggest an overdose of
inane '50s TV shows), I thought the repetitive "humours" comment in
response to constructive postings from yourself was blatant.
I usually try to limit my contributions to this ng to excerpts from my
fairly extensive antique and modern Dutch genealogical sources, but
when I see people like Hines just running around muddying the real
research that can be done here, I just feel obligated to speak up.
-Wally