GEN-MEDIEVAL-L Archives

Archiver > GEN-MEDIEVAL > 1998-02 > 0888467103


From: G . EDWARD ALLEN< >
Subject: Re: Countess Ida and the Bradenstoke Cartulary
Date: 25 Feb 1998 20:25:03 -0800


D. Spencer Hines wrote:
>
> Vide infra
>
> D. Spencer Hines
> --
>
> "Well, that's what I mean. You know, if all the people who are named
> ...deny it....That's all, I mean, I expect them to come looking into it and
> interview you and everything, uh, but I just think that if everybody's on
> record denying it you've got no problem.....I wonder if I'm going to be
> blown out of the water with this. I don't see how they can...if they don't,
> if they don't have pictures."
>
> Governor Bill Clinton --- Telephonic Advice to Gennifer Flowers [1991]
>
> G . EDWARD ALLEN wrote in message <>...
> >This was a rather lengthy and loud thread which took place almost a year
> >ago.See DejaNews
> >
> >In 1979, the Wiltshire Record Society published The Cartulary of
> >Bradenstoke Priory, which was edited by Vera C.M. London.
> >
> >p. 9 has a discussion of the Countess Ida which two of the included
> >abstracts mention as the mother of William Longespee.
>
> No quotation of the cited material. No discussion of the provenance of the
> document, or its interpretation.
>
> >
> >These two abstractions can be found on p. 143 and p.188. These are
> >probably also found in DejaNews.
> >
> >DSH's position is that since none of us has handled, seen, or read the
> >originals, that it is clatrap. [sic] [claptrap???]
>
> Horseradish. Don't attempt to put words in my mouth. Since when have you
> taken up mind reading as an avocation?
>
> My post was addressed to Todd and his coterie. He made the original post on
> this matter. Has he lost the power of speech?
>
> <snip of much wishful thinking, hopeful and pious speculation and authority
> rattling>
>
> >Unfortunately, Gary Boyd Roberts prematurely released news that Douglas
> >Richardson had an article on the burner, which has yet to see the light
> >of print several years later. No one else has worked on the problem
> >because it is not the done thing to purloin someone else's work, even if
> >that someone might be considered slothful :-)
>
> Why do you choose to fault Gary Boyd Roberts? He may have cleared what he
> said in 1993 in RD500 with Richardson. Let's not jump to conclusions. What
> does Richardson have to say?
>
> D. Spencer Hines

Dear Spencer,

Since you feel that I did not accurately state your position, would you
please state it for the record clearly, succinctly, and in one page or
less.

And for the record, I do score highly on tests for parapsychology. How
clever of you to have guessed :-)

I have quoted the material previously and it is probably available on
DejaNews. At that time I also gave a description of the material and of
its history.

I may not be a member of anyone's coterie, but since I participated in
the earlier thread and I am possessed of a mouth to speak and fingers
with which to type, I availed myself of opportunity. I'm sure Mr.
Farmerie will respond, should he feel the need.

As for Gary Boyd Roberts, you can query him at the HisGen during the
week, except Mondays. Mr. Richardson's number and address are in his
advertisements. I suggest that you query them for elucidation upon this
question. I wouldn't wish to be further accused of presumptuousness in
reading their minds.

Have a marvelous evening. Spokoyni noch, Spencer.

Kay

This thread: