_What_ is a Genealogist?
gatherers. I am a gatherer and have no trouble admitting that. I see
Richardson as a gatherer pretending to be a hunter.
As I have said many times before, if he stopped grandstanding and
acknowledged his limitations many, including Peter Stewart, would have
been
only too willing to steer him into the right direction, and all and
everybody would benefit. Now all he can do is stroke his ego, look at all
the attention he is getting.
Best wishes
Leo
----- Original Message -----
From: "Tony Ingham" <nugget10@hotkey.net.au
To: <GEN-MEDIEVAL-L@rootsweb.com
Sent: Thursday, September 29, 2005 9:32 AM
Subject: Re: Pulling our Wieght
Hello CED,
I note that you have one thing in common with 'Douglas.'
Neither of you are Genealogists.
The main difference is that you admit to it.
Keep pushing,
Tony Ingham
CED wrote:
To the Newsgroup:
I am so sorry to have read the following from one of Peter Stewart's
posts:
"Why do you all sit around waiting for someone else to take up such
elementary points? This is a discussion GROUP, not a dialogue.
"Is no-one offended by the delinquency of Richardson crowing "Yikes!
The
short end of it: Your theory falls to the ground, crashes, and burns.
Game
over. So sorry." when nothing remotely of the sort has taken place?
"I am shortly going to leave this newsgroup, and the reason is NOT
Richardson's inanities, but rather the passivity and complicity of
readers
who consistently remain quiet about them. This in my view is
irresponsible,
and I don't choose to go on corresponding with a lot of people who
won't
pull their weight."
First: I apologize to Peter for failing to join him in his attempts to
keep Richardson honest. I do posit an excuse: I am not a genealogist.
I am a writer in the field of history. As a poster, I do not use my
college Latin, lest I make an error, opening up an opportunity for a
vicious Richardson attack. I do not have immediate access to medieval
documents. For these reasons I fear that any effort that I make would
be unhelpful. I shall try to do better.
Second: We need Peter. Only a very few active posters are as qualified
as he to tackle major genealogical problems in the medieval period.
Richardson does make attempt to do so; but his motives (ego and the
sale of his books) and his incompetence (deficiencies in languages,
medieval culture, and medieval history) leave him suspect. Without
Peter, we are left with Richardson.
Third: Peter appears to be tired. That is understandable.
Richardson's most potent weapon is his insistence on his always being
right and his persistence in maintaining that upon which he insists --
regardless of what others maintain to the contrary. Richardson's
policy is is to wear down those who disagree with him and then claim
victory for his position so that it can be published in one of his
books. Peter is being worn down.
Also, if Richardson finds himself cornered, he changes his position,
twists the argument, and shifts the burden of proof to the other side.
We can find many examples of this practice. Recently, I found a good
example regarding the maternity of Alice of France. He took one
position; and when proven wrong, changed his position; then claimed
(and continues to claim)credit for discovering proof of the second
position.
So Peter, please hang on; help may be coming.
CED