On May 7, 9:10 am, Douglas Richardson <royalances...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> On May 7, 9:38 am, t...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
>
> < Curiously, the National Archives (UK) shows 94 examples of "de
> < Holland" and 334 of "de Holand", most entries in both categories
> being
> < medieval. It seems that while there is a preference, modern
> < archivists are less than categorical about these things.
> taf cites google hits and modern catalogues, but studiously avoids
> consulting actual medieval records. Why is that?
Because your claim was inherently modern in its nature - what form a
current researcher should use. A study of the forms used by the
current researchers at the National Archives seems entirely relevant.
Unfortunately, they seem not to place such respect in the
inviolability of consistency as you do.
> Answer: He's just a lazy son of gun, that's all.
Yes, that's right. Mr. Richardson insists that there is one and only
one right way to refer to these people. I show that not all of his
colleagues in the field agree, using a convenient survey, and what is
his conclusion? I am lazy. Obviously, it can't be that he is
overreaching. It can't be that his statements that there is only a
single way of doing things, his way, is misplaced. It must be my
fault.
Well, since you have again moved the goalposts, I must again show you
vacuous:
"Ego Rob. Collayn dedi Johi f. Rogi de Barlow ad vitam oia mess. terr.
&c. in Barlow, Chollerton &c. ; rem. Johi f. Johis & haer. de corpe
ip'ius Johis f. Joh'se f. Rici de Holland. Test. Jo de Radcliffe de
Chaderton ; Ad. de Lever jun. ; Rico de Redish ; Jac. de Barlow. Ric.
II."
So, even in medieval times there was more than a single way to refer
to these people. Given that the standard is now the vernacular form
in their own day, what form are you using for Charlemagne? Or
William the Conqueror? He certainly never called himself either
William or "theConqueror". Oh, I forgot - all rules are simply ad hoc
justification for personal preference, so it doesn't mater what they
called themselves, what matters is your own whimsical choice.
> The truth is never far away, but it is if you don't want it.
It appears that for you, the truth is never far away, since your
personal preferences determine the 'truth'.
taf
|
