HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: katherim@fraser.sfu.ca (Katherine Merle Mason)
Subject: Re: The story of the Scottish flag
Organization: Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, B.C., Canada
Date: Mon, 21 Dec 1992 17:06:56 GMT

I'm sorry, but I cannot in good conscience let this stand unscathed.


crdunlea@rodan.acs.syr.edu (Christopher R. Dunlea) writes:

>In article <1gjr34INN1o8@network.ucsd.edu> fledgist@weber.ucsd.edu (Fragano Ledgister) writes:

>Canada, too, was partially in English possession by 1603 because Humphrey 
>Gilbert and Raleigh established bases in Newfoundland. 

John Cabot was the first to discover Newfoundland (an Italian - real name
Giovanni Caboto - working for the English) in 1497.  It was supposedly
Britian's first colony, declared so a century later by Gilbert.  It was
not however until 1855 that settlement was permitted in Newfoundland.
Before that there was just a seasonal fishing fleet which came ashore
to salt its catch.  The bases you speak of did not exist.  The fishing
companies didn't want competition from year round residents and other
merchants, so all year round habitation was declared illegal (it did
happen anyway, this is true, but in the eyes of the English (PC before
1707) it was not legitimate settlement.

>So there was an Elizabeth I by 1603 in several of what became the 
>Dominions.

The dominion of Newfoundland?  Never heard of it.


>Of ourse, the whole argument is facetious. It doesn't matter a
>fig, because England is and always has been the ONLY nation of the
>United kingdom that really mattered throughout its history.

This is good flame-bait, especially in a string called the story
of the SCOTTISH flag.  However, as I said above, I cannot in good
conscience let this stand unscathed.  England has definetly always
been the most noticed nation.  However:  ANALOGY - a pond.  Which is
more noticable, the clean water and marine life underneath or the
stale, stagnant fungus on top?  Which is more important? 

>Chris STILL the Smartass

Merry Christmas, one and all.
Katherine Merle Mason
Ne Oublie...
Xref: sparky soc.culture.celtic:8357 soc.culture.british:17896
From: cc@dcs.ed.ac.uk (Chris Cooke)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.celtic,soc.culture.british,uk.politics
Subject: Re: UK unemployment figures
Date: 21 Dec 92 17:27:10 GMT
	<1992Dec21.163009.14059@osf.org>
Organization: Department of Computer Science, University of Edinburgh, Scotland

In article <1992Dec21.163009.14059@osf.org> david@postman.gr.osf.org (David George) writes:

   Matthew hardly springs to mind as some die-hard Tory, in fact he's
   probably trying to scrape a living on some lecturer's salary in London and
   getting mighty pissed off with some of the crap which seems to eminate
   from Edinburgh Uni.

Hey, we're not all Friends of Fernando Poo here you know :-)

Matthew's repeated point about poverty in the South is a very valid one; but
his "anti-Northern" whingeing is very tiresome.
--
	-- Chris. 	cc@dcs.ed.ac.uk   (on Janet, cc@uk.ac.ed.dcs)

		
Newsgroups: soc.culture.celtic,soc.culture.british
From: crdunlea@rodan.acs.syr.edu (Christopher R. Dunlea)
Subject: Re: The story of the Scottish flag
Organization: Syracuse University, Syracuse, NY
Date: Sun, 27 Dec 92 22:19:51 EST

In article <1har91INNjm0@network.ucsd.edu> fledgist@weber.ucsd.edu (Fragano Ledgister) writes:
>In article <1992Dec23.162938.20649@newstand.syr.edu> crdunlea@rodan.acs.syr.edu (Christopher R. Dunlea) writes:
>>In article <ljeqi1INNf2@exodus.Eng.Sun.COM> chrisp@regenmeister.Sun.COM (Chris Prael) writes:
>>By that argument, so does France's, Wales', Scotland, Germany's...I could go
>>on but that would be ridiculous, like your answer. The royal family of
>
>This is simply wrong. France's royal families (there are three,
>counting the Orleans line as separate)haven't had a throne to sit on
>for over a century. Wales never had _a_ royal family (independent
>Wales was never a united principality). The Scottish royal family is
>extinct in the male line (though there is still, I think, a
>Pretender). Germany's royal family has been out of the reigning
>business since 1918.
>

Granted. My point, however, was that the bloodlines of the monarchies
of Europe are so intertwined that the English royal family is less
English than any of their subjects, so to speak. They have all the 
mentioned bloodlines and any of the monarchs of Europe, with a little
stretching, could fill in for the monarchs of other countries (after
all, where did the royal families of the Balkan kingdoms come from? 
Mostly Germany). The important thing here is not whose king sat on ehose
throne but where real power flowed from.

>
>>the United Kingdom sits atop a throne founded by Cedric of Wessex, if 
>>you must know. Wessex is in southern England. 
>
>Cedric is not a Saxon name. Would you by any chance mean Egbert?

Sorry, I meant to write Cerdic. He is mentioned in the Anglo-SAxon 
Chronicle as having landed in Britain in 494 and conquering the 
kingdom of Wessex (the West Saxons).
>
Chris


Newsgroups: soc.culture.celtic
From: katherim@fraser.sfu.ca (Katherine Merle Mason)
Subject: Re: Kilts
Organization: Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, B.C., Canada
Date: Mon, 28 Dec 1992 20:06:51 GMT

hiscrp@nuscc.nus.sg (C R Pennell) writes:

[stuff deleted to save bandwidth]i

>Now this is interesting because a few years back, the then Lord Lyon King
>of Arms, head of the College of HEralds in Scotland, Sir Thomas Innes of
>Learnay by name threatened to imprison tourists who made use of tartans to
>which they were not entitled. He may have been completly  batty, of
>course, but presumably he has SOME legal grounds for doing this. There
>seems to be a great distance between legal conservation of family names -
>and therefor kinship relations - and the desire to call yourself Coffee
>Table! Unless this comes from old practices of attatching yourself to a
>new patron by adopting his clan name. ANyone got any ideas about this?

>Richard Pennell History NUS.

I have always been taught that one recieves the priviledge of wearing
a tartan by virtue of loyalty to the laird of one's clan.  It does not
matter if you were born to it (although an individual's position in the
clan is somewhat dependant on this) or if you decide to swear allegiance
to the laird of clan coffee table.  The idea here, I guess, is that the
right to wear a tartan is like a fief from the laird, which is a 
privilidge of loyalty.  As to laws, I have never heard of one which sets
this in stone, but I had always assumed it was generally obeyed by 
custom.

Katherine Merle Mason
Ne Oublie....
From: cockburn@edieng.enet.dec.com (Craig Cockburn)
Newsgroups: uk.politics,soc.culture.celtic
Subject: Re: The pitfalls of buying property (was Re: UK unemployment figures)
Date: 1 Jan 93 11:24:27 GMT
Organization: Digital Equipment Co. Ltd., Reading, England


In article <1992Dec22.131802.21861@infodev.cam.ac.uk>, gdb15@grebe.cl.cam.ac.uk (Guy Barry) writes...

>I think the problem is that for many people, especially with families,
>buying property is the only feasible option, since the private rented
>sector is so small.  This is a peculiarly British problem, I think --
>people are almost blackmailed into buying property because they're led
>to believe that renting is somehow "throwing money away".  (The fact

My parents in Scotland viewed my selling out of the Southern England
property market and moving to rented accomodation as a waste of money
two years ago. The money I've saved in the last two years which would
otherwise have gone into a mortgage has proved me right, but they still
view renting as a waste of money. They have lived in the same house for
30 years and so maybe take a more long term view!

The big problem with selling a house and going rented is that unless
you sell all your furniture, you have to rent unfurnished. Finding
somewhere unfurnished in Reading wasn't too much of a problem, but
finding somewhere unfurnished in Edinburgh was damn near impossible. 
We really only want to rent until we can find somewhere to buy, but
there's nowhere available for less than 6 months. It seems the system
makes life difficult for people who sell out of the houseing market and
rent unfurnished.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Craig Cockburn  (leaving Digital on 4th Jan)
New internet address: craig@smo.ac.uk (working now)
Voice after 7th Jan: +[44] 31 554 2926
Moving to Edinburgh, yahoo!
From: cwilson@gssec.bt.co.uk (Colin Wilson)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.celtic
Subject: Re: Gaelic Translation and Pronounciation Please
Date: 23 Dec 92 17:15:28 GMT
Organization: BT

In article <1992Dec22.203429.15306@clts1.comlab.ox.ac.uk>, Geraint.Jones@comlab.oxford.ac.uk (Geraint Jones) writes:
|> halchuk@seismo.emr.ca wrote:
|> (  A post doctoral fellow from Scotland has offered special Scottish 
|>  ) delicacies (haggis?) for the correct pronounciation and translation
|> (  of the following phrase:
|>  ) 
|> (  "Nollaig chridheil agus bliadhna mhath 'ur"
|>  ) 
|> (  any help in translating this would be greatly appreciated
|> 
|> That would surely be `Nadolig llawen a blwyddyn newydd dda'.               /
|> That should teach you to ask for translations without saying              /
|> into which language you wanted the translation.                          / g

Why? What makes you so sure that he won't understand Welsh?

Blwyddyn newydd dda i chi hefyd.

********************************************************************************
*  Colin Wilson,                           E-mail:  cwilson@gssec.bt.co.uk     *
*  Glasgow Engineering Centre,             POTS:    (041) 220 5340             *
*  British Telecommunications plc.                  (+ 44 41) 220 5340         *
*  7 Caledon Street,                                                           *
*  Glesca / Glaschu G12 9BY,             Scotland a Twa-Leidit Fowkrick        *
*  Scotland / Alba.                      Biodh Alba 'na Poblachd Dha-Chananach *  ********************************************************************************
Newsgroups: soc.culture.celtic,soc.culture.british
From: bvaughan@sheps.Princeton.EDU (Barbara Vaughan)
Subject: Re: The story of the Scottish flag
Originator: news@nimaster
Organization: Princeton University
Date: Wed, 30 Dec 1992 20:15:02 GMT

In article <28174@dog.ee.lbl.gov> mike@fionn (Michael Helm) writes:
>Fragano Ledgister writes:
>>Christopher R. Dunlea writes:
>>>A "few decades" translates into roughly 1600-1690. I don't know, call
>
>>Indentures were only significant from the 1620s to the 1640s.
>
>Indentured servitude was an important part of the Pennsylvania German
>immigration, & this didn't even start until the late 17th century...

There were two types of indentured servitude, involuntary and voluntary. 
The second type continued much longer.  Actually, my father came to the US
from Ireland (by way of Glasgow) as a teenager under terms that were
indentured servitude in fact if not in name.  He signed papers in Glasgow
agreeing to work for a farmer in Pennsylvania for room, board and
occasional pocket money in exchange for passage to the US.  This was in
the early 1920's and wasn't legal at the time, although my father didn't
know this.  I think the term was five or seven years. He served out his
term, doing backbreaking farm work from dawn to after sunset, and never
thought he was badly treated; as a matter of fact, one of his his sisters
came over later and married the farmer's son.  My father had great
nostalgia for that time of his life, where farming was still done with
hand tools and draft animals, where there was no electricity, and where
nothing but horse-drawn sleighs could be used for transport from late
November until early April.  He had no nostalgia for either Ireland or
Scotland, where he endured grinding poverty and never had enough to eat.

Barbara Vaughan

Xref: sparky soc.culture.celtic:8472 soc.culture.british:18097
From: fledgist@weber.ucsd.edu (Fragano Ledgister)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.celtic,soc.culture.british
Subject: Re: The story of the Scottish flag
Date: 29 Dec 1992 09:01:14 GMT
Organization: University of California, San Diego
NNTP-Posting-Host: weber.ucsd.edu

In article <1992Dec29.010647.26921@newstand.syr.edu> crdunlea@rodan.acs.syr.edu (Christopher R. Dunlea) writes:
>
>You are assuming that the Glorious Revolution was more than it really was. 
>In the opinions of several historians of the age, such as John Childs, 
>1689 was merely the culmination of the gains of 1649, nothing more. Both
>the Russian Revolution and the French Revolution were grand starting events, 
>but to see 1688-9 thast way makes no sense. The Bill of Rights (English)
>is better seen in the context of the events of the 1640's than just of the
>1680's, because constitutionally James II never existed--that is, William
>and Parliament acted in 1689 to rescind all the acts of James II and return
>the English Constitution to the days of 1681. 

Another view, following Michael Walzer, is that the 1640s and 1689
were parts of a continuing process, begun in the 16th century, which
did indeed culminate in 1689.

It is worth noting that, after 1689, Parliament was in effect
supreme. A change which was hardly insignificant.


>(PS There were two French Revolutions of the 1790's--and yes, in the context of
>the day, and in the term revolution, 1789 was simply an aristocratic coup
>compared to what followed in 1792.)

The aristocratic coup to which I referred occurred in 1787. The
period of Jacobin dominance, on the other hand, seems to me to be
one stage in the larger process of the Re'volution.

>
>>
>>And note that Parliament kept control of the army's purse-strings
>>(not to mention its very existence) thereafter through the annual
>>Mutiny Acts [general question to whoever may know: when exactly in
>>the 1960s was the Mutiny Act replaced?].
>>
>
>Of course. The reign of James II was an imperial one in which taxes were
>imposed arbitrarily by the royal executive. In any settlement Parliament
>would demand the purse-strings back. But the realization that Parliament
>must control the money was accompanied by the fact that England (and
>with a few years, Britain) was an empire in 1689. Because of the hitherto
>unknown size of the war machine (see figures above) new and larger taxes
>needed to be imposed--and that could only come through cooperation with
>the gentry, ie Parliament. 

Yes. But in the process, the power of the Crown to make foreign
policy was significantly reduced.

>
>By the way, Fragrano, are you at San Diego? What is your backgrond? Are you
>a British historian? You are quite knowledgeable. This has been fun (never 
>got into a real discussion on this net before  :-)  )
>

Yes, I'm at San Diego. I'm a grad student in political science,
working on my doctoral dissertation, which is a comparison of
British and Dutch decolonisation in the Caribbean.

-- 
Dawn over the dark sea brings on the sun;                      
She leans across the hilltop: see, the light!
--------------------------------------------------------------------
fledgist@weber.ucsd.edu
Newsgroups: soc.culture.celtic
Subject: Re: What is sago?
From: scimitar@suction.acme.gen.nz (Robert Singers)
Date: Mon, 21 Dec 92 18:11:14 +1300
Organization: Barbed Wire Cat Productions

esh2@po.CWRU.Edu (Evelyn S. Hlabse) writes:

> This may not be the appropriate place to post this but I don't
> think the foods net will help.
> 
> I have a cookbook called "Recipes from the Orkney Islands" published
> in 1978.  One of the recipes for a tomato soup calls for something
> called sago.  I've never heard of it.  Can someone help?
> 

Sago is a little bit like tapioca or semolina, but it looks like frogs 
eggs when you make it into a pudding (like a rice pudding).  It comes 
from a plant called the sago palm (which isn't really a palm).

Robert Singers               | Nothing I say or do should be taken as
scimitar@suction.acme.gen.nz | a reflection of any form of reality or
                             | consensual hallucination.
Newsgroups: soc.culture.celtic
From: "richard anstruther" <richard.anstruther@canrem.com>
Subject: dual citizenship
Reply-To: "richard anstruther" <richard.anstruther@canrem.com>
Organization: Canada Remote Systems
Distribution: soc
Date: 30 Dec 92 22:54:00 EST

-> From: bvaughan@sheps.Princeton.EDU (Barbara Vaughan)

-> For those of you with a U.S. passport, open it up and read what it
-> says about dual citizenship.  It's definitely not illegal.  Some
-> actions (such as serving in the armed forces of another country) CAN
-> jeopardize U.S. citizenship; even so, many people with joint
-> US/Israeli citizenship have served in the Israeli armed forces
-> without losing their U.S. citizenship. I have a feeling that the U.S.
-> would draw the line if, for instance, a US/Iraqi citizen served in
-> the armed forces of Iraq.

It should also be borne in mind that U.S. citizenship, particularly
for U.S. born citizens, is not something held at the pleasure
of the U.S. government.  They have tried in the past to strip
individuals of U.S. citizenship, and not always succeeded in court.
I remember reading a couple of U.S. Supreme Court decisions on
this years and years ago, but I can't remember the names of
them now.
--
Canada Remote Systems  - Toronto, Ontario
World's Largest PCBOARD System - 416-629-7000/629-7044
Newsgroups: soc.culture.celtic,soc.culture.british
From: crdunlea@rodan.acs.syr.edu (Christopher R. Dunlea)
Subject: Re: The story of the Scottish flag
Organization: Syracuse University, Syracuse, NY
Date: Tue, 29 Dec 92 02:01:46 EST

In article <1hogguINN97m@network.ucsd.edu> fledgist@weber.ucsd.edu (Fragano Ledgister) writes:
>In article <1992Dec28.210209.25373@newstand.syr.edu> crdunlea@rodan.acs.syr.edu (Christopher R. Dunlea) writes:
>>>
>>>Nonetheless, Arthur is to be found in the royal genealogies. Egbert
>>>was the first person to whom the title King of England could apply.
>>>
>>>
>>
>>Egbert I can accept, because he is was a King of the West Saxons and ancestor
>>of Alfred, the major Saxon king the genalogists look back to anyway. Bt
>>ARTHUR? No, he's way too mythical, and when they put him in there they 
>>might as well include Boudicca and Noah. :-)
>>
>What's that got to do with anything. Royal genealogies have little
>to do with history, and everything to do with legitimation.
>

But aren't they the same in terms of legitimizing a person's blood line? 
And WHAT royal genealogy do you possess that lists Arthur, for God's
sake? Mine only goes as far backas Alfred, because that is as far as
can be reliably determined.

Chris
From: tffreeba@indyvax.iupui.edu
Newsgroups: soc.culture.celtic
Subject: Re: Satellite view of Ireland
Date: 21 Dec 92 12:36:39 -0500

In article <28092@dog.ee.lbl.gov>, mike@fionn.lbl.gov (Michael Helm) writes:
> I was looking thru Liam de Paor's "Portrait of Ireland" (St Martin's
> Pr, 85) & there's a beautiful satellite view of Ireland in one of the
> first few pages.  Uncredited, unlike the other photo plates.  Is
> anyone familiar with the picture in this book?  How about any pointers
> to other satellite/space pictures of Ireland, Scotland, Brittany, &c?

Try NASA's National Space Science Data Center.  Tell what you are looking 
for to "request@nssdc.nasa.gov"
TF Freebairn
From: katherim@fraser.sfu.ca (Katherine Merle Mason)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.celtic
Subject: Re: Kilts
Date: 21 Dec 92 17:49:01 GMT
Organization: Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, B.C., Canada

jack@dcs.glasgow.ac.uk (Jack Campin) writes:


>scimitar@suction.acme.gen.nz (Robert Singers) wrote:
>> 1:  How is a person's right to wearing a particular clan tarten 
>>     determined.  Also how is clan affliation determined.

>Go to a tartan shop in the high street of a Scottish tourist destination and
>look for a chart saying what clan your name is associated with.

>The Hasegawas are a sept of the Campbells and the beni Hashem of the MacLeods,
>of course.  Perhaps for the Cohens a connection with the Brahan Seer might be
>thinkable.

These are not always reflective of individual cases.  Names can be changed
legally, without necessarily reflecting a change in alleigance.  If I
were to look up my name on one of these charts, I might just end up
wearing a Campbell or a MacGregor tartan (something that might cause many 
of my ancestors to roll in their graves).  My last name was changed by
my Grandfather for a variety of reasons.  I am however, clan Graham.  I
think asking your grand-relatives (uncles, aunts, fathers, mothers) who
your ancestors are is the best bet.  If you're still stuck, black watch
is always a safe bet.
>-- 
>--  Jack Campin    room G092, Computing Science Department, Glasgow University,
>17 Lilybank Gardens, Glasgow G12 8RZ, Scotland   TEL: 041 339 8855 x6854 (work)
>INTERNET: jack@dcs.glasgow.ac.uk or via nsfnet-relay.ac.uk    FAX: 041 330 4913
>BANG!net: via mcsun and uknet     BITNET: via UKACRL    UUCP: jack@glasgow.uucp

Merry Christmas,
Katherine Merle Mason
Ne Oublie....
From: sharkey@robots.ox.ac.uk (Paul Sharkey)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.celtic
Subject: Re: This Favorite Lie Again (clarification)
Date: 21 Dec 92 12:06:31 GMT
Organization: Robotics Research Group, Engineering Science Dept, Oxford, UK.
Originator: sharkey@duncan.robots

In <1992Dec14.212631.7232@news.nd.edu> Ulick Stafford writes:

>By my reckoning 5% of voters in Ireland (Eire) voted for Sinn Fein in the recen
>elections in the UK and Free State.  In the Free State the vote was up 
>slightly on the last election, while support in the North was unchanged.
>Much ado was made of the fact that Gerry Adams lost his seat in Westminster
>in the Northern elections but this fact so blantely spun by British 
>Propagandists was due entirely to OUP supporters voting for the SDLP
>candidate.  Like it or not, Sinn Fein support is steady and is not diminishing.

From the top:

A (probably over-) estimate of the population of ROI:    3,000,000
Of which, under 25:                                      1,500,000
Therefore, under 18 (linear approx ie 18/25):            1,080,000

Therefore, eligible to vote:                             1,920,000
Of which, voted at recent elections
          (again probable over-estimate at 65%):         1,248,000
Of which voted for a party that is very careful
   about saying whether it supports the IRA but we all
   know they do anyway (1.8%):                              22,464

or, equivalently, as a percentage of the electorate: 1.17%
                  as a percentage of the population: 7.5 x 10-3  ;-)

Therefore, to paraphrase the same old cat ad:

1,225,536 out of 1,248,000 voters who expressed a preference voted for
parties that condemn the IRA

22,464 out of 1,248,000 voters who expressed a preference voted for a
party that hedges its bets about support for the IRA (but really does)

and

672,000 out of an electorate of 1,920,000 didn't give a buggery bollox
about anything.


Additional note about the 22,464:

In a number of elections in the 80's a large amount of support for
Sinn Fein in Dublin (especially in Tallaght and Crumlin) was directly
attributed to their promise to "clean" the estates of drug pushers and
nothing to do with NI whatsoever. I imagine things haven't changed too
much.

Additional note about Sinn Fein's use of the term "clean":

Read "have the boys come over for tea and a slight adjustment of the
kneecaps" 



So, to paraphrase Ulick:

Like it or not, Sinn Fein support is bollox all.


Paul.

-------------------------------------------------------------------
Dr Paul M Sharkey                   Office:  +44 (0)865 273 150   
Reactive Vision Laboratory          Lab:     +44 (0)865 273 168
Robotics Research Group             Fax:     +44 (0)865 273 908
Dept Engineering Science  
Parks Road, Oxford OX1 3PJ          Email:   sharkey@uk.ac.oxford.robots