Adam Loftus Archbishop of Dublin Lord High Chancellor of Ire
Moderator: MOD_nyhetsgrupper
-
Leo van de Pas
Adam Loftus Archbishop of Dublin Lord High Chancellor of Ire
Adam Loftus, son of Edward Loftus of Swineshead county York, seems to have been of obscure origin, I have not as yet found a the name of his mother. He went to Ireland and became Archbishop of Dublin and Lord High Chancellor. He married Jane Purdon.
The Dictionary of National Biography tells quite a lot about him as well it gives a fair amount about his children. It tells he had 20 children of which 8 died in infancy. These eight are not mentioned by name. I have 12 children by name and will give them here, hopefully in the correct order. DNB does the usual, sons first then daughters, but I made a guess. Any corrections and additions will be gratefully received.
1.Sir Dudley Loftus, of Rathfarnham, born 1561 (?) he married Anne Bagenall, daughter of Sir Nicholas Bagenall and Ellen Griffiths, they had at least four children, Adam, Nicholas, Edward and Samuel. After Sir Dudley died, his wife married Sir Dominck Sarsfield, Viscount Kilmallock.
2,Sir Edward Loftus, he died 10 May 1601 at the siege of Kinsale. He was married to Anne Duke, daughter of Sir Henry Duke, of Castle-Jordan. They did not have children.
3.Adam Loftus, died unmarried and was buried 29 May 1599 in St.Patrick's
4.Isabella Loftus, born about 1567, died 11 Noivember 1597, married Sir William Ussher, Lord Deputy of Ireland, they had at least two children
5.Anne Loftus, died after 5 June 1630. She married (1) Capt. Henry Colley (2) Capt. George Blount (3) Edward Blayney, 1st Baron Blayney. I have at least one child by each husband.
6.Sir Thomas Loftus, Constable of Castle Wicklow, born 1571, died 1 December 1635.
He married Ellen Hartpole, widow of Francis Cosby. Sir Thomas had at least one daugther.
7.Henry Loftus, born 1571 twin with Thomas, he died in infancy.
8.Jane Loftus (also recorded as Catherine). Married (1) Sir Francis Berkeley (2) Henry Berkeley. With her first husband had at least four children.
9.Martha Loftus, buried 19 March 1609 at St.Patrick's. married Sir Thomas Colclough, of Tintern Abbey
10.Dorothy Loftus married Sir John Moore of Croghan
11.Alice Loftus, married Sir Henry Warren
12.Margaret Loftus, married Sir George Colley
Adam Loftus is an ancestor of Arthur Wellesley, Duke of Wellington, the late Queen Mother, Lord Bertrand Russell, Rachel Ward, Sarah Ferguson and two Pioneers to Australia, uncle Edward Pomeroy Barrett-Lennard and his nephew Edmund Thomas Henry Barrett-Lennard.
Can anyone add to this? I am particularly interested into the origins of Sir Frances Berkeley and Henry Berkeley.
Many thanks.
Leo van de Pas
The Dictionary of National Biography tells quite a lot about him as well it gives a fair amount about his children. It tells he had 20 children of which 8 died in infancy. These eight are not mentioned by name. I have 12 children by name and will give them here, hopefully in the correct order. DNB does the usual, sons first then daughters, but I made a guess. Any corrections and additions will be gratefully received.
1.Sir Dudley Loftus, of Rathfarnham, born 1561 (?) he married Anne Bagenall, daughter of Sir Nicholas Bagenall and Ellen Griffiths, they had at least four children, Adam, Nicholas, Edward and Samuel. After Sir Dudley died, his wife married Sir Dominck Sarsfield, Viscount Kilmallock.
2,Sir Edward Loftus, he died 10 May 1601 at the siege of Kinsale. He was married to Anne Duke, daughter of Sir Henry Duke, of Castle-Jordan. They did not have children.
3.Adam Loftus, died unmarried and was buried 29 May 1599 in St.Patrick's
4.Isabella Loftus, born about 1567, died 11 Noivember 1597, married Sir William Ussher, Lord Deputy of Ireland, they had at least two children
5.Anne Loftus, died after 5 June 1630. She married (1) Capt. Henry Colley (2) Capt. George Blount (3) Edward Blayney, 1st Baron Blayney. I have at least one child by each husband.
6.Sir Thomas Loftus, Constable of Castle Wicklow, born 1571, died 1 December 1635.
He married Ellen Hartpole, widow of Francis Cosby. Sir Thomas had at least one daugther.
7.Henry Loftus, born 1571 twin with Thomas, he died in infancy.
8.Jane Loftus (also recorded as Catherine). Married (1) Sir Francis Berkeley (2) Henry Berkeley. With her first husband had at least four children.
9.Martha Loftus, buried 19 March 1609 at St.Patrick's. married Sir Thomas Colclough, of Tintern Abbey
10.Dorothy Loftus married Sir John Moore of Croghan
11.Alice Loftus, married Sir Henry Warren
12.Margaret Loftus, married Sir George Colley
Adam Loftus is an ancestor of Arthur Wellesley, Duke of Wellington, the late Queen Mother, Lord Bertrand Russell, Rachel Ward, Sarah Ferguson and two Pioneers to Australia, uncle Edward Pomeroy Barrett-Lennard and his nephew Edmund Thomas Henry Barrett-Lennard.
Can anyone add to this? I am particularly interested into the origins of Sir Frances Berkeley and Henry Berkeley.
Many thanks.
Leo van de Pas
-
Sutliff
Re: Adam Loftus Archbishop of Dublin Lord High Chancellor of
Comments interspersed below:
""Leo van de Pas"" <leovdpas@netspeed.com.au> wrote in message
news:002401c5a773$ef72c140$0300a8c0@Toshiba...
Sir Edward and his wife had a daughter born 6 July 1601 who died 21 July
1601. Name not known by me.
Eight children: Arthur (wfie, Judith Newcomen), Adam (Ulster King of Arms),
Mary (husband William Crofton), Jane (husband Daniel Molyneux, Ulster King
of Arms), Margaret (husband Sir Beverly Newcomen, 2nd Broin Newcomen) ,
Alice (husband Sir Thomas Philipps), Eleanor (husband Sir Christopher
Foster, Mayor of Dublin), Anne (husband Sir Robert Mereidth, Chancellor of
the Exchequer)
Am certain of 1 daughter by Blount and 2 sons and 6 daughters by Blayney
Daughter Dorothy married to Richard St. George of Athlone
No children
Two other daughters:
Catherine Loftus
Mary Loftus, died young
Cannot help on the Berkeleys of Limerick
<snip>
HS
""Leo van de Pas"" <leovdpas@netspeed.com.au> wrote in message
news:002401c5a773$ef72c140$0300a8c0@Toshiba...
Adam Loftus, son of Edward Loftus of Swineshead county York, seems to have
been of obscure origin, I have not as yet found a the name of his mother.
He went to Ireland and became Archbishop of Dublin and Lord High
Chancellor. He married Jane Purdon.
snip
2,Sir Edward Loftus, he died 10 May 1601 at the siege of Kinsale. He was
married to Anne Duke, daughter of Sir Henry Duke, of Castle-Jordan. They
did not have children.
Sir Edward and his wife had a daughter born 6 July 1601 who died 21 July
1601. Name not known by me.
snip
4.Isabella Loftus, born about 1567, died 11 Noivember 1597, married Sir
William Ussher, Lord Deputy of Ireland, they had at least two children
Eight children: Arthur (wfie, Judith Newcomen), Adam (Ulster King of Arms),
Mary (husband William Crofton), Jane (husband Daniel Molyneux, Ulster King
of Arms), Margaret (husband Sir Beverly Newcomen, 2nd Broin Newcomen) ,
Alice (husband Sir Thomas Philipps), Eleanor (husband Sir Christopher
Foster, Mayor of Dublin), Anne (husband Sir Robert Mereidth, Chancellor of
the Exchequer)
5.Anne Loftus, died after 5 June 1630. She married (1) Capt. Henry Colley
(2) Capt. George Blount (3) Edward Blayney, 1st Baron Blayney. I have at
least one child by each husband.
Am certain of 1 daughter by Blount and 2 sons and 6 daughters by Blayney
snip
10.Dorothy Loftus married Sir John Moore of Croghan
Daughter Dorothy married to Richard St. George of Athlone
11.Alice Loftus, married Sir Henry Warren
No children
12.Margaret Loftus, married Sir George Colley
Two other daughters:
Catherine Loftus
Mary Loftus, died young
Cannot help on the Berkeleys of Limerick
<snip>
HS
-
Sutliff
Re: Adam Loftus Archbishop of Dublin Lord High Chancellor of
Make that 2nd Baron Newcomen rather than my typo. Sorry.
"Sutliff" <suthen@redshift.com> wrote in message
news:11gmr0mkblasnaf@corp.supernews.com...
"Sutliff" <suthen@redshift.com> wrote in message
news:11gmr0mkblasnaf@corp.supernews.com...
Comments interspersed below:
""Leo van de Pas"" <leovdpas@netspeed.com.au> wrote in message
news:002401c5a773$ef72c140$0300a8c0@Toshiba...
Adam Loftus, son of Edward Loftus of Swineshead county York, seems to
have
been of obscure origin, I have not as yet found a the name of his mother.
He went to Ireland and became Archbishop of Dublin and Lord High
Chancellor. He married Jane Purdon.
snip
2,Sir Edward Loftus, he died 10 May 1601 at the siege of Kinsale. He was
married to Anne Duke, daughter of Sir Henry Duke, of Castle-Jordan. They
did not have children.
Sir Edward and his wife had a daughter born 6 July 1601 who died 21 July
1601. Name not known by me.
snip
4.Isabella Loftus, born about 1567, died 11 Noivember 1597, married Sir
William Ussher, Lord Deputy of Ireland, they had at least two children
Eight children: Arthur (wfie, Judith Newcomen), Adam (Ulster King of
Arms),
Mary (husband William Crofton), Jane (husband Daniel Molyneux, Ulster King
of Arms), Margaret (husband Sir Beverly Newcomen, 2nd Broin Newcomen) ,
Alice (husband Sir Thomas Philipps), Eleanor (husband Sir Christopher
Foster, Mayor of Dublin), Anne (husband Sir Robert Mereidth, Chancellor of
the Exchequer)
5.Anne Loftus, died after 5 June 1630. She married (1) Capt. Henry Colley
(2) Capt. George Blount (3) Edward Blayney, 1st Baron Blayney. I have at
least one child by each husband.
Am certain of 1 daughter by Blount and 2 sons and 6 daughters by Blayney
snip
10.Dorothy Loftus married Sir John Moore of Croghan
Daughter Dorothy married to Richard St. George of Athlone
11.Alice Loftus, married Sir Henry Warren
No children
12.Margaret Loftus, married Sir George Colley
Two other daughters:
Catherine Loftus
Mary Loftus, died young
Cannot help on the Berkeleys of Limerick
snip
HS
-
John Brandon
Re: Adam Loftus Archbishop of Dublin Lord High Chancellor of
5.Anne Loftus, died after 5 June 1630. She married (1) Capt. Henry Colley
(2) Capt. George Blount (3) Edward Blayney, 1st Baron Blayney. I have at
least one child by each husband.
Am certain of 1 daughter by Blount and 2 sons and 6 daughters by Blayney
Doug,
Didn't we notice that the supposed Loftus-Blaney line behind the
Bladens of Maryland was incorrect? I'm wracking my brain, but can't
quite remember the details ...
John
-
John Brandon
Re: Adam Loftus Archbishop of Dublin Lord High Chancellor of
Didn't we notice that the supposed Loftus-Blaney line behind the
Bladens of Maryland was incorrect? I'm wracking my brain, but can't
quite remember the details ...
The new ODNB has a biography of a certain Dudley Loftus that seems to
ring some bells:
"Loftus was married twice. His first wife was Frances (d. 1691), the
daughter and heir of Patrick Nangle, son of Thomas, styled baron of
Navan. They had two sons, Dudley and Adam, and five daughters, Mary,
Jane, Letitia, Frances, and Catherine, all of whom either died young or
unmarried with the sole exception of Letitia, who married a Mr Bladen."
-
Douglas Richardson royala
Re: Adam Loftus Archbishop of Dublin Lord High Chancellor of
Yes, John, you're correct. It was alleged that the Bladen family of
Maryland had the Loftus connection, but they "loft" it.
DR
Maryland had the Loftus connection, but they "loft" it.
DR
-
John Brandon
Re: Adam Loftus Archbishop of Dublin Lord High Chancellor of
but they "loft" it.
And they might even have written it that way (in the handwriting of the
period) ...!
-
Peter Stewart
Re: Adam Loftus Archbishop of Dublin Lord High Chancellor of
"John Brandon" <starbuck95@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1124832708.863090.303500@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
No they might not - long 's' is NOT 'f', but merely looks somewhat like it
when unfamiliar to modern eyes.
The practice, sometimes seen on SGM, of changing the handwritten or printed
long 's' into 'f' in typeface that doesn't include the original character is
wrong.
Peter Stewart
news:1124832708.863090.303500@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
but they "loft" it.
And they might even have written it that way (in the handwriting of the
period) ...!
No they might not - long 's' is NOT 'f', but merely looks somewhat like it
when unfamiliar to modern eyes.
The practice, sometimes seen on SGM, of changing the handwritten or printed
long 's' into 'f' in typeface that doesn't include the original character is
wrong.
Peter Stewart
-
John Brandon
Re: Adam Loftus Archbishop of Dublin Lord High Chancellor of
No they might not - long 's' is NOT 'f', but merely looks somewhat like it
when unfamiliar to modern eyes.
Close enough, I would think, to allow for a small jokey joke ...
But His Highness is *not amused,* apparently.
-
Douglas Richardson royala
Re: Adam Loftus Archbishop of Dublin Lord High Chancellor of
Dear John ~
I was making a pun, but it obviously went over the head of "Peter
Stewart."
DR
John Brandon wrote:
I was making a pun, but it obviously went over the head of "Peter
Stewart."
DR
John Brandon wrote:
No they might not - long 's' is NOT 'f', but merely looks somewhat like it
when unfamiliar to modern eyes.
Close enough, I would think, to allow for a small jokey joke ...
But His Highness is *not amused,* apparently.
-
Peter Stewart
Re: Adam Loftus Archbishop of Dublin Lord High Chancellor of
Richardson wrote:
No, you were failing to make a pun by falling into the vulgar error of
rendering long 's' as 'f' - and since this is a newsgroup dedicated to
the study of old documentary sources, it was appropriate to point out
the mistake that leads you & others to think this popular but wrong
notion can provide a "pun".
This would have been feeble anyway, and the squib was in no way
improved by Brandon trying in his own ignorance to belabour it.
After so many years of seeing my name - including in an e-mail address
provided by the Australian government, that your friend Robert Baxter
approached on your behalf in a failed attempt to get me barred from the
newsgroup - I should think you would learn to address the substance of
my criticisms or to leave these alone, rather then trying to deflect
attention onto the critic.
Or are you so forgetful and unintelligent that you now suppose the
Australian government is conspiring with me to do you dirt and cover my
tracks in a pseudonym?
You can't even make sensible use of the evidence before you on
contemporary matters such as this, and yet you expect us to give
credence to your witless witterings on medieval subjects....
Peter Stewart
Dear John ~
I was making a pun, but it obviously went over the head of "Peter
Stewart."
No, you were failing to make a pun by falling into the vulgar error of
rendering long 's' as 'f' - and since this is a newsgroup dedicated to
the study of old documentary sources, it was appropriate to point out
the mistake that leads you & others to think this popular but wrong
notion can provide a "pun".
This would have been feeble anyway, and the squib was in no way
improved by Brandon trying in his own ignorance to belabour it.
After so many years of seeing my name - including in an e-mail address
provided by the Australian government, that your friend Robert Baxter
approached on your behalf in a failed attempt to get me barred from the
newsgroup - I should think you would learn to address the substance of
my criticisms or to leave these alone, rather then trying to deflect
attention onto the critic.
Or are you so forgetful and unintelligent that you now suppose the
Australian government is conspiring with me to do you dirt and cover my
tracks in a pseudonym?
You can't even make sensible use of the evidence before you on
contemporary matters such as this, and yet you expect us to give
credence to your witless witterings on medieval subjects....
Peter Stewart
-
Douglas Richardson royala
Re: Adam Loftus Archbishop of Dublin Lord High Chancellor of
Dear John ~
It's clear from "Peter`Stewart"'s response that he has no sense of
humor. So what else is new?
DR
It's clear from "Peter`Stewart"'s response that he has no sense of
humor. So what else is new?
DR
-
Peter Stewart
Re: Adam Loftus Archbishop of Dublin Lord High Chancellor of
Richardson wrote:
It's clear from Richardson's response that he can't take in the simple
fact of his joke's dismal misfire, or the reasons for this, and thinks
it was funny to start with; equally that he can't fathom the nonsense
he is making with inverted commas around my name, even when this is
pointed out to him.
Nothing new there....
The Australian government does not provide internet access to people
under phoney names. That's all there is to it.
Peter Stewart
Dear John ~
It's clear from "Peter`Stewart"'s response that he has no sense
of humor. So what else is new?
It's clear from Richardson's response that he can't take in the simple
fact of his joke's dismal misfire, or the reasons for this, and thinks
it was funny to start with; equally that he can't fathom the nonsense
he is making with inverted commas around my name, even when this is
pointed out to him.
Nothing new there....
The Australian government does not provide internet access to people
under phoney names. That's all there is to it.
Peter Stewart
-
Douglas Richardson royala
Re: Adam Loftus Archbishop of Dublin Lord High Chancellor of
So "Peter" - are you a government official or Australia's "leading
literary critic"? Which is it? Or neither?
Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
Website: http://www.royalancestry.net
Peter Stewart wrote:
literary critic"? Which is it? Or neither?
Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
Website: http://www.royalancestry.net
Peter Stewart wrote:
Richardson wrote:
Dear John ~
It's clear from "Peter`Stewart"'s response that he has no sense
of humor. So what else is new?
It's clear from Richardson's response that he can't take in the simple
fact of his joke's dismal misfire, or the reasons for this, and thinks
it was funny to start with; equally that he can't fathom the nonsense
he is making with inverted commas around my name, even when this is
pointed out to him.
Nothing new there....
The Australian government does not provide internet access to people
under phoney names. That's all there is to it.
Peter Stewart
-
Peter Stewart
Re: Adam Loftus Archbishop of Dublin Lord High Chancellor of
<royalancestry@msn.com> wrote in message
news:1124866846.671956.317190@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
I have never claimed to be either of these - and I am not responsible for
your fevered imagination about me.
Your difficulty in answering my criticisms has led you into yet another
dishonest adventure in trying to cast some kind of lurid reflection onto my
identity, but this is just another failure on your part.
It doesn't matter who I am or what I am called, or what else I might do
apart from participating in this newsgroup. Here I am, and will remain, a
critic of nonsense and falsehood. Get used to it.
Peter Stewart
news:1124866846.671956.317190@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
So "Peter" - are you a government official or Australia's "leading
literary critic"? Which is it? Or neither?
I have never claimed to be either of these - and I am not responsible for
your fevered imagination about me.
Your difficulty in answering my criticisms has led you into yet another
dishonest adventure in trying to cast some kind of lurid reflection onto my
identity, but this is just another failure on your part.
It doesn't matter who I am or what I am called, or what else I might do
apart from participating in this newsgroup. Here I am, and will remain, a
critic of nonsense and falsehood. Get used to it.
Peter Stewart
-
Leo van de Pas
Re: Adam Loftus Archbishop of Dublin Lord High Chancellor of
What relevance has this to medieval genealogy or history? As far as I am
concerned he could be a real estate agent................
----- Original Message -----
From: <royalancestry@msn.com>
To: <GEN-MEDIEVAL-L@rootsweb.com>
Sent: Wednesday, August 24, 2005 5:00 PM
Subject: Re: Adam Loftus Archbishop of Dublin Lord High Chancellor of
Ireland
concerned he could be a real estate agent................
----- Original Message -----
From: <royalancestry@msn.com>
To: <GEN-MEDIEVAL-L@rootsweb.com>
Sent: Wednesday, August 24, 2005 5:00 PM
Subject: Re: Adam Loftus Archbishop of Dublin Lord High Chancellor of
Ireland
So "Peter" - are you a government official or Australia's "leading
literary critic"? Which is it? Or neither?
Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
Website: http://www.royalancestry.net
Peter Stewart wrote:
Richardson wrote:
Dear John ~
It's clear from "Peter`Stewart"'s response that he has no sense
of humor. So what else is new?
It's clear from Richardson's response that he can't take in the simple
fact of his joke's dismal misfire, or the reasons for this, and thinks
it was funny to start with; equally that he can't fathom the nonsense
he is making with inverted commas around my name, even when this is
pointed out to him.
Nothing new there....
The Australian government does not provide internet access to people
under phoney names. That's all there is to it.
Peter Stewart
-
Peter Stewart
Re: Adam Loftus Archbishop of Dublin Lord High Chancellor of
""Leo van de Pas"" <leovdpas@netspeed.com.au> wrote in message
news:014b01c5a887$a4ddfc70$0300a8c0@Toshiba...
Quite so, Leo. And even a thoroughly dishonest real estate agent, used to
making bogus claims about property for sale, would draw the line at placing
quotation marks around "Australia's leading literary critic", intending to
misrepresent this as something that had been stated by me.
But of course this is a level of fraudulence we have come to expect from
Richardson.
Peter Stewart
news:014b01c5a887$a4ddfc70$0300a8c0@Toshiba...
What relevance has this to medieval genealogy or history? As far as I am
concerned he could be a real estate agent................
----- Original Message -----
From: <royalancestry@msn.com
To: <GEN-MEDIEVAL-L@rootsweb.com
Sent: Wednesday, August 24, 2005 5:00 PM
Subject: Re: Adam Loftus Archbishop of Dublin Lord High Chancellor of
Ireland
So "Peter" - are you a government official or Australia's "leading
literary critic"? Which is it? Or neither?
Quite so, Leo. And even a thoroughly dishonest real estate agent, used to
making bogus claims about property for sale, would draw the line at placing
quotation marks around "Australia's leading literary critic", intending to
misrepresent this as something that had been stated by me.
But of course this is a level of fraudulence we have come to expect from
Richardson.
Peter Stewart
-
John Brandon
Re: Adam Loftus Archbishop of Dublin Lord High Chancellor of
Here I am, and will remain, a critic of nonsense and falsehood. Get used to it.
Peter Stewart
As well as a practitioner of extreme pomposity ...
-
Peter Stewart
Re: Adam Loftus Archbishop of Dublin Lord High Chancellor of
The arbitrary opinions of a conceited gadfly who buzzes so unproductively
through this newsgroup don't convince anyone else but himself.
Peter Stewart
"John Brandon" <starbuck95@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1124887302.677345.105350@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
through this newsgroup don't convince anyone else but himself.
Peter Stewart
"John Brandon" <starbuck95@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1124887302.677345.105350@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
Here I am, and will remain, a critic of nonsense and falsehood. Get used
to it.
Peter Stewart
As well as a practitioner of extreme pomposity ...
-
John Brandon
Re: Adam Loftus Archbishop of Dublin Lord High Chancellor of
But you couldn't resist replying to it.
-
Douglas Richardson royala
Re: Adam Loftus Archbishop of Dublin Lord High Chancellor of
"Leo van de Pas" wrote:
Naw. A real estate agent would at least have a sense of humor.
Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
Website: http://www.royalancestry.net
What relevance has this to medieval genealogy or history? As far as I am
concerned he could be a real estate agent................
Naw. A real estate agent would at least have a sense of humor.
Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
Website: http://www.royalancestry.net
-
Douglas Richardson royala
Re: Adam Loftus Archbishop of Dublin Lord High Chancellor of
Peter Stewart wrote:
Calling John Brandon a gadfly is wrong, "Peter." Name calling has no
place on the newsgroup.
DR
The arbitrary opinions of a conceited gadfly who buzzes so unproductively
through this newsgroup don't convince anyone else but himself.
Peter Stewart
Calling John Brandon a gadfly is wrong, "Peter." Name calling has no
place on the newsgroup.
DR
-
John Brandon
Re: Adam Loftus Archbishop of Dublin Lord High Chancellor of
Then I can assume you are not nor have been involved in the real estate
business as you wouldn't know humour if it bit you.
Hmmm, maybe this is why all of Leo's humorous sayings (so-called) have
a 'biting' undertone ...?
-
John Brandon
Re: Adam Loftus Archbishop of Dublin Lord High Chancellor of
Or maybe I meant a bitching undertone ...?
-
Douglas Richardson royala
Re: Adam Loftus Archbishop of Dublin Lord High Chancellor of
What line of work did "Peter Stewart" work in? We're told he is
Australia's "leading literary critic." But no such person exists.
Have we been deceived?
DR
"Leo van de Pas" wrote:
Australia's "leading literary critic." But no such person exists.
Have we been deceived?
DR
"Leo van de Pas" wrote:
Then I can assume you are not nor have been involved in the real estate
business as you wouldn't know humour if it bit you.
----- Original Message -----
From: <royalancestry@msn.com
To: <GEN-MEDIEVAL-L@rootsweb.com
Sent: Thursday, August 25, 2005 1:40 AM
Subject: Re: Adam Loftus Archbishop of Dublin Lord High Chancellor of
Ireland
"Leo van de Pas" wrote:
What relevance has this to medieval genealogy or history? As far as I am
concerned he could be a real estate agent................
Naw. A real estate agent would at least have a sense of humor.
Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
Website: http://www.royalancestry.net
-
John Brandon
Re: OT Richardsonb drivel was Re: Adam Loftus Archbishop of
_We are told_by whom? If someone told you this, you have to ask that person
and it wouldn't be Peter Stewarta and so by whom were you deceived? And what
has it got to do with medieval genealogy or history?
Leo, are you telling us that the real last name is "Stewarta"? Makes
sense, I guess.
-
Leo van de Pas
Re: Adam Loftus Archbishop of Dublin Lord High Chancellor of
Then I can assume you are not nor have been involved in the real estate
business as you wouldn't know humour if it bit you.
----- Original Message -----
From: <royalancestry@msn.com>
To: <GEN-MEDIEVAL-L@rootsweb.com>
Sent: Thursday, August 25, 2005 1:40 AM
Subject: Re: Adam Loftus Archbishop of Dublin Lord High Chancellor of
Ireland
business as you wouldn't know humour if it bit you.
----- Original Message -----
From: <royalancestry@msn.com>
To: <GEN-MEDIEVAL-L@rootsweb.com>
Sent: Thursday, August 25, 2005 1:40 AM
Subject: Re: Adam Loftus Archbishop of Dublin Lord High Chancellor of
Ireland
"Leo van de Pas" wrote:
What relevance has this to medieval genealogy or history? As far as I am
concerned he could be a real estate agent................
Naw. A real estate agent would at least have a sense of humor.
Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
Website: http://www.royalancestry.net
-
Leo van de Pas
OT Richardsonb drivel was Re: Adam Loftus Archbishop of Dubl
_We are told_by whom? If someone told you this, you have to ask that person
and it wouldn't be Peter Stewarta and so by whom were you deceived? And what
has it got to do with medieval genealogy or history?
----- Original Message -----
From: <royalancestry@msn.com>
To: <GEN-MEDIEVAL-L@rootsweb.com>
Sent: Thursday, August 25, 2005 6:21 AM
Subject: Re: Adam Loftus Archbishop of Dublin Lord High Chancellor of
Ireland
and it wouldn't be Peter Stewarta and so by whom were you deceived? And what
has it got to do with medieval genealogy or history?
----- Original Message -----
From: <royalancestry@msn.com>
To: <GEN-MEDIEVAL-L@rootsweb.com>
Sent: Thursday, August 25, 2005 6:21 AM
Subject: Re: Adam Loftus Archbishop of Dublin Lord High Chancellor of
Ireland
What line of work did "Peter Stewart" work in? We're told he is
Australia's "leading literary critic." But no such person exists.
Have we been deceived?
DR
"Leo van de Pas" wrote:
Then I can assume you are not nor have been involved in the real estate
business as you wouldn't know humour if it bit you.
----- Original Message -----
From: <royalancestry@msn.com
To: <GEN-MEDIEVAL-L@rootsweb.com
Sent: Thursday, August 25, 2005 1:40 AM
Subject: Re: Adam Loftus Archbishop of Dublin Lord High Chancellor of
Ireland
"Leo van de Pas" wrote:
What relevance has this to medieval genealogy or history? As far as I
am
concerned he could be a real estate agent................
Naw. A real estate agent would at least have a sense of humor.
Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
Website: http://www.royalancestry.net
-
John Brandon
Re: OT Richardsonb drivel was Re: Adam Loftus Archbishop of
Leo, are you telling us that the real last name is "Stewarta"? Makes
sense, I guess.
Or maybe it's a woman called "Stewarta" ....
-
Douglas Richardson royala
Re: OT Richardsonb drivel was Re: Adam Loftus Archbishop of
Dear Leo ~
My last name is spelled Richardson, not Richardsonb. Thanks!
DR
"Leo van de Pas" wrote:
My last name is spelled Richardson, not Richardsonb. Thanks!
DR
"Leo van de Pas" wrote:
_We are told_by whom? If someone told you this, you have to ask that person
and it wouldn't be Peter Stewarta and so by whom were you deceived? And what
has it got to do with medieval genealogy or history?
----- Original Message -----
From: <royalancestry@msn.com
To: <GEN-MEDIEVAL-L@rootsweb.com
Sent: Thursday, August 25, 2005 6:21 AM
Subject: Re: Adam Loftus Archbishop of Dublin Lord High Chancellor of
Ireland
What line of work did "Peter Stewart" work in? We're told he is
Australia's "leading literary critic." But no such person exists.
Have we been deceived?
DR
"Leo van de Pas" wrote:
Then I can assume you are not nor have been involved in the real estate
business as you wouldn't know humour if it bit you.
----- Original Message -----
From: <royalancestry@msn.com
To: <GEN-MEDIEVAL-L@rootsweb.com
Sent: Thursday, August 25, 2005 1:40 AM
Subject: Re: Adam Loftus Archbishop of Dublin Lord High Chancellor of
Ireland
"Leo van de Pas" wrote:
What relevance has this to medieval genealogy or history? As far as I
am
concerned he could be a real estate agent................
Naw. A real estate agent would at least have a sense of humor.
Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
Website: http://www.royalancestry.net
-
Peter Stewart
Re: Adam Loftus Archbishop of Dublin Lord High Chancellor of
<royalancestry@msn.com> wrote in message
news:1124914908.823296.315360@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
Another flat lie from Richardson - the newsgroup has NOT been told that I am
"Australia's leading literary critic". This is his own invention.
The next sentence is correct, although not as Richardson intended: no such
person exists, because literary criticism is not prone to leadership - or
followership for that matter - and Australia as an English-speaking nation
could hardly have a self-contained profession anyway.
As to literary criticism written by me, this has nothing to do with SGM
discussions. The only mention I have made of this as far as I can recall was
of a single review from years ago, to refute a falsehood regarding my views
on a particular series of books. There is no question of deceit in this. I
did not represent myself as a member of any particular profession, and this
is nobody's business here anyway. Book reviews can be, and are, written by
people who do other things.
In the moronic and hysterical responses from Richardson and Brandon,
however, there is indeed deceit, and extreme folly.
Peter Stewart
news:1124914908.823296.315360@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
What line of work did "Peter Stewart" work in? We're told he is
Australia's "leading literary critic." But no such person exists.
Have we been deceived?
Another flat lie from Richardson - the newsgroup has NOT been told that I am
"Australia's leading literary critic". This is his own invention.
The next sentence is correct, although not as Richardson intended: no such
person exists, because literary criticism is not prone to leadership - or
followership for that matter - and Australia as an English-speaking nation
could hardly have a self-contained profession anyway.
As to literary criticism written by me, this has nothing to do with SGM
discussions. The only mention I have made of this as far as I can recall was
of a single review from years ago, to refute a falsehood regarding my views
on a particular series of books. There is no question of deceit in this. I
did not represent myself as a member of any particular profession, and this
is nobody's business here anyway. Book reviews can be, and are, written by
people who do other things.
In the moronic and hysterical responses from Richardson and Brandon,
however, there is indeed deceit, and extreme folly.
Peter Stewart
-
Douglas Richardson royala
Re: Adam Loftus Archbishop of Dublin Lord High Chancellor of
Dear "Peter":
If it's true you've only written one book review over the past several
years, you're clearly not one of Australia's leading literary critics.
So just what are you?
Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
Peter Stewart wrote:
If it's true you've only written one book review over the past several
years, you're clearly not one of Australia's leading literary critics.
So just what are you?
Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
Peter Stewart wrote:
royalancestry@msn.com> wrote in message
news:1124914908.823296.315360@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
What line of work did "Peter Stewart" work in? We're told he is
Australia's "leading literary critic." But no such person exists.
Have we been deceived?
Another flat lie from Richardson - the newsgroup has NOT been told that I am
"Australia's leading literary critic". This is his own invention.
The next sentence is correct, although not as Richardson intended: no such
person exists, because literary criticism is not prone to leadership - or
followership for that matter - and Australia as an English-speaking nation
could hardly have a self-contained profession anyway.
As to literary criticism written by me, this has nothing to do with SGM
discussions. The only mention I have made of this as far as I can recall was
of a single review from years ago, to refute a falsehood regarding my views
on a particular series of books. There is no question of deceit in this. I
did not represent myself as a member of any particular profession, and this
is nobody's business here anyway. Book reviews can be, and are, written by
people who do other things.
In the moronic and hysterical responses from Richardson and Brandon,
however, there is indeed deceit, and extreme folly.
Peter Stewart
-
Leo van de Pas
Re: OT Richardsonb drivel was Re: Adam Loftus Archbishop of
It seems appropriate, having spelled Stewarta, --- a always is ahead of b

As usual you avoid the aspect of a message and concentrate on the trivia,
how appropriate as well.
----- Original Message -----
From: <royalancestry@msn.com>
To: <GEN-MEDIEVAL-L@rootsweb.com>
Sent: Thursday, August 25, 2005 8:16 AM
Subject: Re: OT Richardsonb drivel was Re: Adam Loftus Archbishop of Dublin
Lord High Chancellor of Ireland
As usual you avoid the aspect of a message and concentrate on the trivia,
how appropriate as well.
----- Original Message -----
From: <royalancestry@msn.com>
To: <GEN-MEDIEVAL-L@rootsweb.com>
Sent: Thursday, August 25, 2005 8:16 AM
Subject: Re: OT Richardsonb drivel was Re: Adam Loftus Archbishop of Dublin
Lord High Chancellor of Ireland
Dear Leo ~
My last name is spelled Richardson, not Richardsonb. Thanks!
DR
"Leo van de Pas" wrote:
_We are told_by whom? If someone told you this, you have to ask that
person
and it wouldn't be Peter Stewarta and so by whom were you deceived? And
what
has it got to do with medieval genealogy or history?
----- Original Message -----
From: <royalancestry@msn.com
To: <GEN-MEDIEVAL-L@rootsweb.com
Sent: Thursday, August 25, 2005 6:21 AM
Subject: Re: Adam Loftus Archbishop of Dublin Lord High Chancellor of
Ireland
What line of work did "Peter Stewart" work in? We're told he is
Australia's "leading literary critic." But no such person exists.
Have we been deceived?
DR
"Leo van de Pas" wrote:
Then I can assume you are not nor have been involved in the real
estate
business as you wouldn't know humour if it bit you.
----- Original Message -----
From: <royalancestry@msn.com
To: <GEN-MEDIEVAL-L@rootsweb.com
Sent: Thursday, August 25, 2005 1:40 AM
Subject: Re: Adam Loftus Archbishop of Dublin Lord High Chancellor of
Ireland
"Leo van de Pas" wrote:
What relevance has this to medieval genealogy or history? As far as
I
am
concerned he could be a real estate agent................
Naw. A real estate agent would at least have a sense of humor.
Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
Website: http://www.royalancestry.net
-
John Higgins
Re: Adam Loftus Archbishop of Dublin Lord High Chancellor of
From a posting by DR (AKA: "call me Douglas" Richardson) on 8/2/05 (to cite
one of many examples):
"The newsgroup is about genealogy and making friends"
I fail to see how this exchange of insults (and the earlier notes) meets
either of these supposed goals for the group.
Practice what you preach...or accept the fact that you're properly regarded
as a hypocrite.
----- Original Message -----
From: <royalancestry@msn.com>
To: <GEN-MEDIEVAL-L@rootsweb.com>
Sent: Wednesday, August 24, 2005 4:34 PM
Subject: Re: Adam Loftus Archbishop of Dublin Lord High Chancellor of
Ireland
one of many examples):
"The newsgroup is about genealogy and making friends"
I fail to see how this exchange of insults (and the earlier notes) meets
either of these supposed goals for the group.
Practice what you preach...or accept the fact that you're properly regarded
as a hypocrite.
----- Original Message -----
From: <royalancestry@msn.com>
To: <GEN-MEDIEVAL-L@rootsweb.com>
Sent: Wednesday, August 24, 2005 4:34 PM
Subject: Re: Adam Loftus Archbishop of Dublin Lord High Chancellor of
Ireland
Dear "Peter":
If it's true you've only written one book review over the past several
years, you're clearly not one of Australia's leading literary critics.
So just what are you?
Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
Peter Stewart wrote:
royalancestry@msn.com> wrote in message
news:1124914908.823296.315360@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
What line of work did "Peter Stewart" work in? We're told he is
Australia's "leading literary critic." But no such person exists.
Have we been deceived?
Another flat lie from Richardson - the newsgroup has NOT been told that
I am
"Australia's leading literary critic". This is his own invention.
The next sentence is correct, although not as Richardson intended: no
such
person exists, because literary criticism is not prone to leadership -
or
followership for that matter - and Australia as an English-speaking
nation
could hardly have a self-contained profession anyway.
As to literary criticism written by me, this has nothing to do with SGM
discussions. The only mention I have made of this as far as I can recall
was
of a single review from years ago, to refute a falsehood regarding my
views
on a particular series of books. There is no question of deceit in this.
I
did not represent myself as a member of any particular profession, and
this
is nobody's business here anyway. Book reviews can be, and are, written
by
people who do other things.
In the moronic and hysterical responses from Richardson and Brandon,
however, there is indeed deceit, and extreme folly.
Peter Stewart
-
Peter Stewart
Re: Adam Loftus Archbishop of Dublin Lord High Chancellor of
<royalancestry@msn.com> wrote in message
news:1124926489.132613.66400@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
What possible authority can you have for this new idiocy? I said I had only
referred to one review, NOT that I have only written one. And now you have
switched tack, from "Australia's leading literary critic" to "one of....".
Now why is that? Implicitly admitting your own lie for once?
If you have tried and failed to find any published reviews of mine, that
only tells us what we already know - that you are quite incompetent at
research. Many US libraries hold publications in which reviews of mine have
appeared.
Peter Stewart
news:1124926489.132613.66400@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
Dear "Peter":
If it's true you've only written one book review over the past several
years, you're clearly not one of Australia's leading literary critics.
So just what are you?
What possible authority can you have for this new idiocy? I said I had only
referred to one review, NOT that I have only written one. And now you have
switched tack, from "Australia's leading literary critic" to "one of....".
Now why is that? Implicitly admitting your own lie for once?
If you have tried and failed to find any published reviews of mine, that
only tells us what we already know - that you are quite incompetent at
research. Many US libraries hold publications in which reviews of mine have
appeared.
Peter Stewart
-
Douglas Richardson royala
Re: Adam Loftus Archbishop of Dublin Lord High Chancellor of
If I offended you, John, you have my sincere apology.
Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
Website: http://www.royalancesty.net
"John Higgins" wrote:
Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
Website: http://www.royalancesty.net
"John Higgins" wrote:
From a posting by DR (AKA: "call me Douglas" Richardson) on 8/2/05 (to cite
one of many examples):
"The newsgroup is about genealogy and making friends"
I fail to see how this exchange of insults (and the earlier notes) meets
either of these supposed goals for the group.
Practice what you preach...or accept the fact that you're properly regarded
as a hypocrite.
----- Original Message -----
From: <royalancestry@msn.com
To: <GEN-MEDIEVAL-L@rootsweb.com
Sent: Wednesday, August 24, 2005 4:34 PM
Subject: Re: Adam Loftus Archbishop of Dublin Lord High Chancellor of
Ireland
Dear "Peter":
If it's true you've only written one book review over the past several
years, you're clearly not one of Australia's leading literary critics.
So just what are you?
Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
Peter Stewart wrote:
royalancestry@msn.com> wrote in message
news:1124914908.823296.315360@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
What line of work did "Peter Stewart" work in? We're told he is
Australia's "leading literary critic." But no such person exists.
Have we been deceived?
Another flat lie from Richardson - the newsgroup has NOT been told that
I am
"Australia's leading literary critic". This is his own invention.
The next sentence is correct, although not as Richardson intended: no
such
person exists, because literary criticism is not prone to leadership -
or
followership for that matter - and Australia as an English-speaking
nation
could hardly have a self-contained profession anyway.
As to literary criticism written by me, this has nothing to do with SGM
discussions. The only mention I have made of this as far as I can recall
was
of a single review from years ago, to refute a falsehood regarding my
views
on a particular series of books. There is no question of deceit in this.
I
did not represent myself as a member of any particular profession, and
this
is nobody's business here anyway. Book reviews can be, and are, written
by
people who do other things.
In the moronic and hysterical responses from Richardson and Brandon,
however, there is indeed deceit, and extreme folly.
Peter Stewart
-
Peter Stewart
Re: Peter Stewart's Book Reviews
Tony Ingram wrote:
I doubt this, but stranger things have happened under the moon, I
suppose.
Anyone who wished to "make friends" on SGM would have apologised by now
for the falsehoods and absurdities that he has posted to the newsgroup
in the course of his pathetically misjudged "cyber stalking" of my
off-list activities.
And of course this would not be more insincere tripe like his
conditional "apology" to John Higgins.
<snip>
I didn't see Gordon's amusing post. Unfortunately I'm only one of these
three - although I can think of a few surgical incisions I might like
to make as a result of this brou-haha, these would not be done in a
Christian spirit.
But this Google result indicates how readily Richardson and Brandon
could have found what they were so obsessively looking for, if only
they had a little commonsense between them.
Instead Brandon, in a lather of determination to find a gay person,
apparently searched for "Peter" "literature" "Australia" "gay" or some
such string of nonsense, to come up with Peter Rose and decide that he
must be me.
Were the Bobbsey twins that stupid?
Peter Stewart
Gordon,
Thanks for helping the 'Bobbsey Twins' with their in-depth research.
Richo may be somehow able to squeeze it into his next (shudder)
edition of RPA.
Of course, don't expect any acknowledgement of the fact that you
put him on the right tram.
Maybe we have now reached a stage where Douglas can honestly
answer queries relating to his publications?
I doubt this, but stranger things have happened under the moon, I
suppose.
Anyone who wished to "make friends" on SGM would have apologised by now
for the falsehoods and absurdities that he has posted to the newsgroup
in the course of his pathetically misjudged "cyber stalking" of my
off-list activities.
And of course this would not be more insincere tripe like his
conditional "apology" to John Higgins.
<snip>
Gordon Banks wrote:
If you Google "Peter Stewart" Australia "book review", you find a Peter
Stewart who reviews for an Australian literary journal called Meanjin,
one who reviews for the Australia New Zealand Journal of Surgery, and
one who reviews for Australian Youth for Christ.
I suspect our Peter is the former. Of course it would be much more
interesting if he were all three! ;-}
I didn't see Gordon's amusing post. Unfortunately I'm only one of these
three - although I can think of a few surgical incisions I might like
to make as a result of this brou-haha, these would not be done in a
Christian spirit.
But this Google result indicates how readily Richardson and Brandon
could have found what they were so obsessively looking for, if only
they had a little commonsense between them.
Instead Brandon, in a lather of determination to find a gay person,
apparently searched for "Peter" "literature" "Australia" "gay" or some
such string of nonsense, to come up with Peter Rose and decide that he
must be me.
Were the Bobbsey twins that stupid?
Peter Stewart
-
Tony Ingham
Re: Peter Stewart's Book Reviews
Gordon,
Thanks for helping the 'Bobbsey Twins' with their in-depth research.
Richo may be somehow able to squeeze it into his next (shudder) edition
of RPA.
Of course, don't expect any acknowledgement of the fact that you put him
on the right tram.
Maybe we have now reached a stage where Douglas can honestly answer
queries relating to his publications?
What say you Douglas?
Tony Ingham
Gordon Banks wrote:
Thanks for helping the 'Bobbsey Twins' with their in-depth research.
Richo may be somehow able to squeeze it into his next (shudder) edition
of RPA.
Of course, don't expect any acknowledgement of the fact that you put him
on the right tram.
Maybe we have now reached a stage where Douglas can honestly answer
queries relating to his publications?
What say you Douglas?
Tony Ingham
Gordon Banks wrote:
If you Google "Peter Stewart" Australia "book review", you find a Peter
Stewart who reviews for an Australian literary journal called Meanjin,
one who reviews for the Australia New Zealand Journal of Surgery, and
one who reviews for Australian Youth for Christ.
I suspect our Peter is the former. Of course it would be much more
interesting if he were all three! ;-}
On Thu, 2005-08-25 at 03:54 +0000, Peter Stewart wrote:
royalancestry@msn.com> wrote in message
news:1124926489.132613.66400@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
Dear "Peter":
If it's true you've only written one book review over the past several
years, you're clearly not one of Australia's leading literary critics.
So just what are you?
What possible authority can you have for this new idiocy? I said I had only
referred to one review, NOT that I have only written one. And now you have
switched tack, from "Australia's leading literary critic" to "one of....".
Now why is that? Implicitly admitting your own lie for once?
If you have tried and failed to find any published reviews of mine, that
only tells us what we already know - that you are quite incompetent at
research. Many US libraries hold publications in which reviews of mine have
appeared.
Peter Stewart
-
Uriah N. Owen
Re: Adam Loftus Archbishop of Dublin Lord High Chancellor of
Peter Stewart wrote:
Come come, Stewart, such a display of false modisty! repeatedly
rejecting Mr. Richardson's compliment, especially when your close
colleague Rosie Bevan has stated that you are an "admired literary
critic in Australia"! (See Rosie Bevan's post, April 23rd, subject
"Barons of Malpas", this forum).
You could easily dispel any and all doubt about your authenticity by
reference to article/articles in another publication - one that bears
your signature "Peter M. Stewart:, as displayed in your header to this
forum ?
<snip>
Cheers, Uriah
royalancestry@msn.com> wrote in message
news:1124926489.132613.66400@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
Dear "Peter":
If it's true you've only written one book review over the past several
years, you're clearly not one of Australia's leading literary critics.
So just what are you?
What possible authority can you have for this new idiocy? I said I had only
referred to one review, NOT that I have only written one. And now you have
switched tack, from "Australia's leading literary critic" to "one of....".
Come come, Stewart, such a display of false modisty! repeatedly
rejecting Mr. Richardson's compliment, especially when your close
colleague Rosie Bevan has stated that you are an "admired literary
critic in Australia"! (See Rosie Bevan's post, April 23rd, subject
"Barons of Malpas", this forum).
You could easily dispel any and all doubt about your authenticity by
reference to article/articles in another publication - one that bears
your signature "Peter M. Stewart:, as displayed in your header to this
forum ?
<snip>
Cheers, Uriah
-
Peter Stewart
Re: Adam Loftus Archbishop of Dublin Lord High Chancellor of
"Uriah N. Owen" <U_N_Owen@pobox.co.uk> wrote in message
news:1125038929.989531.123590@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
If you are being so drearily idiotic as to persist in this appalling & stale
nonsense about doubting my identity, you are neverthessless on another wrong
track at the same time - as I told Brandon once before, the e-mail address
has NOTHING to do with it, any more than "royalancestry" is required to be
your own proper name just because you use that for posts signed Douglas
Richardson.
Australians don't usually give a middle initial anyway, so that even if mine
were "M." this would never appear in print.
"Modisty" apart, the difference between "Australia's leading literary
critic" and "one of..." is instantly obcvious to everyone except Richardson.
We all know from the "cognatus" business that he can't comprehend the
definite article, and here he comes again under a patently phoney name to
prove that Uriah N. Owen shares this peculiar affliction. And all the while
dredging over a bogus question about someone else's identity....this man is
aiming to become the vile apotheosis of hypocrisy.
Peter Stewart
news:1125038929.989531.123590@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
Peter Stewart wrote:
royalancestry@msn.com> wrote in message
news:1124926489.132613.66400@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
Dear "Peter":
If it's true you've only written one book review over the past several
years, you're clearly not one of Australia's leading literary critics.
So just what are you?
What possible authority can you have for this new idiocy? I said I had
only
referred to one review, NOT that I have only written one. And now you
have
switched tack, from "Australia's leading literary critic" to "one
of....".
Come come, Stewart, such a display of false modisty! repeatedly
rejecting Mr. Richardson's compliment, especially when your close
colleague Rosie Bevan has stated that you are an "admired literary
critic in Australia"! (See Rosie Bevan's post, April 23rd, subject
"Barons of Malpas", this forum).
You could easily dispel any and all doubt about your authenticity by
reference to article/articles in another publication - one that bears
your signature "Peter M. Stewart:, as displayed in your header to this
forum ?
If you are being so drearily idiotic as to persist in this appalling & stale
nonsense about doubting my identity, you are neverthessless on another wrong
track at the same time - as I told Brandon once before, the e-mail address
has NOTHING to do with it, any more than "royalancestry" is required to be
your own proper name just because you use that for posts signed Douglas
Richardson.
Australians don't usually give a middle initial anyway, so that even if mine
were "M." this would never appear in print.
"Modisty" apart, the difference between "Australia's leading literary
critic" and "one of..." is instantly obcvious to everyone except Richardson.
We all know from the "cognatus" business that he can't comprehend the
definite article, and here he comes again under a patently phoney name to
prove that Uriah N. Owen shares this peculiar affliction. And all the while
dredging over a bogus question about someone else's identity....this man is
aiming to become the vile apotheosis of hypocrisy.
Peter Stewart
-
John Brandon
Re: Peter Stewart's Book Reviews
Instead Brandon, in a lather of determination to find a gay person,
apparently searched for "Peter" "literature" "Australia" "gay" or some
such string of nonsense, to come up with Peter Rose and decide that he
must be me.
Speaking of "strings of nonsense"! Peter Rose's somewhat turgid and
stilted style was the main reason I thought 'he' might be 'you.'
Gayness had nothing to do with it.
-
Peter Stewart
Re: Peter Stewart's Book Reviews
"John Brandon" <starbuck95@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1125063951.638464.89120@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
Patent rubbish, trying to excupate yourself when it's already too late - you
had to find him in the first place while searching for me, and that could
only come about through stupidity & incompetence.
Anyone with a grain of sense would never have started this crazy & futile
inquisition into my off-list activities, since there was NO way this could
have achieved any purpose of yours. I have never represented anything esle I
do as providing credentials for the study of medieval genealogy.
The insane focus on me personally is just a tawdry, unbalanced and
ineffective attempt to distract from your pathetic inability to answer any
of the salient points that I and others have raised in criticism of
Richardson and yourself.
We ALL know that, even you.
Peter Stewart
news:1125063951.638464.89120@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
Instead Brandon, in a lather of determination to find a gay person,
apparently searched for "Peter" "literature" "Australia" "gay" or some
such string of nonsense, to come up with Peter Rose and decide that he
must be me.
Speaking of "strings of nonsense"! Peter Rose's somewhat turgid and
stilted style was the main reason I thought 'he' might be 'you.'
Gayness had nothing to do with it.
Patent rubbish, trying to excupate yourself when it's already too late - you
had to find him in the first place while searching for me, and that could
only come about through stupidity & incompetence.
Anyone with a grain of sense would never have started this crazy & futile
inquisition into my off-list activities, since there was NO way this could
have achieved any purpose of yours. I have never represented anything esle I
do as providing credentials for the study of medieval genealogy.
The insane focus on me personally is just a tawdry, unbalanced and
ineffective attempt to distract from your pathetic inability to answer any
of the salient points that I and others have raised in criticism of
Richardson and yourself.
We ALL know that, even you.
Peter Stewart
-
Douglas Richardson royala
Re: Peter Stewart's Book Reviews
Peter Stewart wrote:
We do?
DR
We ALL know that, even you.
Peter Stewart
We do?
DR
-
Peter Stewart
Re: Peter Stewart's Book Reviews
<royalancestry@msn.com> wrote in message
news:1125128579.343775.211710@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
Even Brandon, as I said - maybe not ALL however, because Richardson himself
is far too thick-skinned and narcissistic to realise that most SGM readers
detest his self-serving deceit and hypocrisy.
Peter Stewart
news:1125128579.343775.211710@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
Peter Stewart wrote:
We ALL know that, even you.
Peter Stewart
We do?
Even Brandon, as I said - maybe not ALL however, because Richardson himself
is far too thick-skinned and narcissistic to realise that most SGM readers
detest his self-serving deceit and hypocrisy.
Peter Stewart
-
Douglas Richardson royala
Re: Peter Stewart's Book Reviews
Peter Stewart wrote:
< Even Brandon, as I said - maybe not ALL however, because Richardson
himself
< is far too thick-skinned and narcissistic to realise that most SGM
readers
< detest his self-serving deceit and hypocrisy.
<
< Peter Stewart
If you have issues with another poster, you should take it to private.
That's the right thing to do. The newsgroup is for medieval genealogy,
and for making friends.
Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
Website: http://www.royalancestry.net
< Even Brandon, as I said - maybe not ALL however, because Richardson
himself
< is far too thick-skinned and narcissistic to realise that most SGM
readers
< detest his self-serving deceit and hypocrisy.
<
< Peter Stewart
If you have issues with another poster, you should take it to private.
That's the right thing to do. The newsgroup is for medieval genealogy,
and for making friends.
Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
Website: http://www.royalancestry.net
-
Peter Stewart
Re: Peter Stewart's Book Reviews
<royalancestry@msn.com> wrote in message
news:1125130420.732026.27150@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
It doesn't matter how many time you post this worthless smarm, I am not
going to correspond with you off-list.
If you won't engage in a specific discussion of your shortcomings, & yet
genuinely want to test what I have said in the forum where you have chosen
to promote yourself, why not ask for any SGM readers who think you are
always honest, collegial and altruistic to come forward in support? Then we
will see how many respected contributors you can muster, and how many prefer
to keep quiet on the subject.
Peter Stewart
news:1125130420.732026.27150@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
Peter Stewart wrote:
Even Brandon, as I said - maybe not ALL however, because Richardson
himself
is far too thick-skinned and narcissistic to realise that most SGM
readers
detest his self-serving deceit and hypocrisy.
Peter Stewart
If you have issues with another poster, you should take it to private.
That's the right thing to do. The newsgroup is for medieval genealogy,
and for making friends.
It doesn't matter how many time you post this worthless smarm, I am not
going to correspond with you off-list.
If you won't engage in a specific discussion of your shortcomings, & yet
genuinely want to test what I have said in the forum where you have chosen
to promote yourself, why not ask for any SGM readers who think you are
always honest, collegial and altruistic to come forward in support? Then we
will see how many respected contributors you can muster, and how many prefer
to keep quiet on the subject.
Peter Stewart
-
John Brandon
Re: Peter Stewart's Book Reviews
Speaking of "strings of nonsense"! Peter Rose's somewhat
turgid and stilted style was the main reason I thought 'he'
might be 'you.' Gayness had nothing to do with it.
Patent rubbish, trying to excupate yourself when it's already
too late - you had to find him in the first place while searching > for me, and that could only come about through stupidity &
incompetence.
And so the 'strings' continue ...
-
Peter Stewart
Re: Peter Stewart's Book Reviews
"John Brandon" <starbuck95@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1125161826.692432.246300@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
The difference being that my point is cogent, or you would surely try to
answer it instead of resorting to yet another vapid, nonsensical evasion.
Will you ever find the self-respect to speak up for yourself properly, or
keep quiet?
Peter Stewart
news:1125161826.692432.246300@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
Speaking of "strings of nonsense"! Peter Rose's somewhat
turgid and stilted style was the main reason I thought 'he'
might be 'you.' Gayness had nothing to do with it.
Patent rubbish, trying to excupate yourself when it's already
too late - you had to find him in the first place while searching > for
me, and that could only come about through stupidity &
incompetence.
And so the 'strings' continue ...
The difference being that my point is cogent, or you would surely try to
answer it instead of resorting to yet another vapid, nonsensical evasion.
Will you ever find the self-respect to speak up for yourself properly, or
keep quiet?
Peter Stewart
-
John Brandon
Re: Peter Stewart's Book Reviews
Will you ever find the self-respect to speak up for yourself properly, or
keep quiet?
I don't see that self-respect has much to do with it. I'm really not
inclined to engage with you on any very profound level, and yet it _is_
amusing to post just a little, irritating something (all that's
required for a rather longer response from you).
-
Peter Stewart
Re: Peter Stewart's Book Reviews
"John Brandon" <starbuck95@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1125247036.637859.200670@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
So you are "really not inclined to engage" with me, yet you are avid to take
up any minute of my time and monopolise any scrap of my attention.
These replies take seconds out of my day, and then I don't think of you
again.
But John Brandon has without doubt become the most inane & contemptible fool
in this newsgroup. Congratulations, if that is your aim.
Peter Stewart
news:1125247036.637859.200670@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
Will you ever find the self-respect to speak up for yourself properly, or
keep quiet?
I don't see that self-respect has much to do with it. I'm really not
inclined to engage with you on any very profound level, and yet it _is_
amusing to post just a little, irritating something (all that's
required for a rather longer response from you).
So you are "really not inclined to engage" with me, yet you are avid to take
up any minute of my time and monopolise any scrap of my attention.
These replies take seconds out of my day, and then I don't think of you
again.
But John Brandon has without doubt become the most inane & contemptible fool
in this newsgroup. Congratulations, if that is your aim.
Peter Stewart
-
John Brandon
Re: Peter Stewart's Book Reviews
These replies take seconds out of my day, and then I don't think of you
again.
Ditto.
But John Brandon has without doubt become the most inane & contemptible fool
in this newsgroup. Congratulations, if that is your aim.
Ah, sticks and stones ...
-
Peter Stewart
Re: Peter Stewart's Book Reviews
"John Brandon" <starbuck95@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1125319807.339362.61850@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
However, we can all see that you go searching absurdly on the internet for
any trace of me, or even of other writers in Australia who happen to be my
namesakes; and that you fail dismally. This is obsessive, a sickness by most
people's standards, beyond the silly & tedious fluff that is your usual
contribution to the newsgroup.
And still you don't have the self-respect to keep quiet when you have made
such a complete fool of yourself....
Peter Stewart
news:1125319807.339362.61850@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
These replies take seconds out of my day, and then I don't think of you
again.
Ditto.
However, we can all see that you go searching absurdly on the internet for
any trace of me, or even of other writers in Australia who happen to be my
namesakes; and that you fail dismally. This is obsessive, a sickness by most
people's standards, beyond the silly & tedious fluff that is your usual
contribution to the newsgroup.
And still you don't have the self-respect to keep quiet when you have made
such a complete fool of yourself....
Peter Stewart
-
Douglas Richardson royala
The newsgroup is for medieval genealogy
Dear Mr. Stewart ~
It is inappropriate to call people names on the newsgroup such as fool,
moron, embicile, gadfly, etc. If you have issues with another poster,
the right thing to do is take to private. The newsgroup is for
medieval genealogy, and for making friends.
Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
Website: http://www.royalancestry.net
Peter Stewart wrote:
It is inappropriate to call people names on the newsgroup such as fool,
moron, embicile, gadfly, etc. If you have issues with another poster,
the right thing to do is take to private. The newsgroup is for
medieval genealogy, and for making friends.
Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
Website: http://www.royalancestry.net
Peter Stewart wrote:
"John Brandon" <starbuck95@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1125319807.339362.61850@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
These replies take seconds out of my day, and then I don't think of you
again.
Ditto.
However, we can all see that you go searching absurdly on the internet for
any trace of me, or even of other writers in Australia who happen to be my
namesakes; and that you fail dismally. This is obsessive, a sickness by most
people's standards, beyond the silly & tedious fluff that is your usual
contribution to the newsgroup.
And still you don't have the self-respect to keep quiet when you have made
such a complete fool of yourself....
Peter Stewart
-
John Brandon
Re: Peter Stewart's Book Reviews
However, we can all see that you go searching absurdly on the internet for
any trace of me, or even of other writers in Australia who happen to be my
namesakes; and that you fail dismally. This is obsessive, a sickness by most
people's standards, beyond the silly & tedious fluff that is your usual
contribution to the newsgroup.
And still you don't have the self-respect to keep quiet when you have made
such a complete fool of yourself....
Peter Stewart
This is too funny! He actually thinks that his high-handed beratings
will get people to shut up.
Probably very similar to the treatment the Cavendish-Bentincks and
Boyles used to dish out to their servants.
-
Gjest
Re: The newsgroup is for medieval genealogy
What line of work did "Peter Stewart" work in? We're told he is
Australia's "leading literary critic." But no such person exists.
Have we been deceived?
DR
*******************
Dear Mr. Stewart ~
It is inappropriate to call people names on the newsgroup such as fool,
moron, embicile, gadfly, etc. If you have issues with another poster,
the right thing to do is take to private. The newsgroup is for
medieval genealogy, and for making friends.
Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
********************
I find it hard to reconcile these two statements having come from the
same person. I value your genealogical contributions, but not these -
they diminish the respect you otherwise deserve.
Kind regards
MAR
Australia's "leading literary critic." But no such person exists.
Have we been deceived?
DR
*******************
Dear Mr. Stewart ~
It is inappropriate to call people names on the newsgroup such as fool,
moron, embicile, gadfly, etc. If you have issues with another poster,
the right thing to do is take to private. The newsgroup is for
medieval genealogy, and for making friends.
Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
********************
I find it hard to reconcile these two statements having come from the
same person. I value your genealogical contributions, but not these -
they diminish the respect you otherwise deserve.
Kind regards
MAR
-
Gjest
Re: Peter Stewart's Book Reviews
John Brandon" <starbuc...@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:
I'm reluctant to add anything to this tedious and unprofitable
exchange, but may I please ask you to try sticking to genealogy, where
you have I am sure many more valuable contributions to offer, rather
than clogging the list with material that is designed to irritate; it
doesn't just irritate Mr Stewart and it reflects poorly on you, I'm
afraid to say.
Kind regards
Michael Andrews-Reading
I don't see that self-respect has much to do with it. I'm really not
inclined to engage with you on any very profound level, and yet it _is_
amusing to post just a little, irritating something (all that's
required for a rather longer response from you).
I'm reluctant to add anything to this tedious and unprofitable
exchange, but may I please ask you to try sticking to genealogy, where
you have I am sure many more valuable contributions to offer, rather
than clogging the list with material that is designed to irritate; it
doesn't just irritate Mr Stewart and it reflects poorly on you, I'm
afraid to say.
Kind regards
Michael Andrews-Reading
-
John Brandon
Re: Peter Stewart's Book Reviews
it reflects poorly on you, I'm afraid to say.
Well, that is your view, but you haven't helped me with anything, so I
can't say I'm very worried what you think. Perhaps, like Leo, you'll
now killfile me, but then (revealingly) respond to my postings ("my
settings don't seem to be working properly, and I just *happened* to
see this one posting").