Dear Dana,
Noone, academic or otherwise, who chooses their words carefully, is
responsible for any misconceptions about their attitude perceived in error
by their readers. Sadly a large number of readers tend to perceive and use
of archival or archaeological sources as being somehow elitist and take
umbrage at that. That is their problem.
Those of us who seek to extend the bounds of truth by investigating myth an
legend in depth in order to establish what truth may be found in their
foundation are castigated by academics on one side and by the general reader
on the other for not perpetuating legend.
My own published work on the Sinclairs is aavailableto anyone who wishes to
purchase it or borrow it from a public library. within it you will find that
I ndistinguish ver carefully between legend, archival record, arcaheological
aretfact, academic opinion from theose better qualified than myself and,
lastly, my own opinion. Any reader may accept, reject oer modify my opions
according to their own insight, knowledge or prejudice.Just because I have
written something does not mean it isgrabvenin stone as 'Divinely Revealed
Truth' My opions are just that, opinions arrived at by reasoned speculation
based upon the avaliable evidence. Many others on this list, including Joe
Erks, take a similar view. Others differ.That is their prerogative. However,
truth is immutable. Opions vary.
Best wishes
Tim
[ This is the Sinclair family discussion list, sinclair@quarterman.org
[ To get off or on the list, see http://sinclair.quarterman.org/list.html