[Up] [Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Re:: Academics patronising attitudes?

Dear Tim -and Joe (who responded last night to my

Tim's most striking failure in Kirkwall was to give a
source for his statement that Henry Sinclair was
called 'Henry the holy' in his lifetime.
William Thomson suggested that that name was bestowed
on Henry in 1890, not 1390, and Tim seemed lost for

And so far no one has responded - including Tim -with
any real concrete refutations  to the sceptical points
- which I emailed to the List a week or mote ago -
made by Thomson in his  'New History of Orkney' about
the Henry/America story. 

All the best,


PS Many thanks to John Q for allowing me to join the
List.I didn't know about the vetting system.Sorry! 

I'm a Sinclair but not a fantasist!

--- Tim Wallace-Murphy
<tim@templartim.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:
> In answer to Henry Root - the differing viewpoints
> of those who study history is not a weaknes. It is a
strength.Difeference and debate,particularly when it
concerns primary sources, is productive and healthy.
> Whenn we all agree there is usually something wron.
> Incidentally the one area of difficulty experienced
> in the Orkney debate
> referred to was over quoting Frederick Pohl.As my
> talk and the bookwhich was
> written about Prince Henry largely refuted some of
> Pohl's misconceptions,
> that was a trifle ironic, but nonetheless productive
> Best wishes

[ Excess quotations omitted. ]


Do You Yahoo!?
Send FREE video emails in Yahoo! Mail!
[ This is the Sinclair family discussion list, sinclair@quarterman.org
[ To get off or on the list, see http://sinclair.quarterman.org/list.html