 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
History Forum / General / Ancient History / December 2004Re: Review of "The Medieval Horse Harness: Revolution or Evolution? A Case Study in Technological Change"
David Read is talking about HIS OWN punctuation, grammar and syntax errors in the REVIEW at the website -- not Gans's errors in his ARTICLE in an Ashgate BOOK, which we have not seen. Do read more closely. There is one grammatical error in the first sentence of the first paragraph of the review: "The title and the conclusion of Paul Gans's short essay tells [sic] the reader that the writer's objective is to examine the role of "medieval horse harness" in the "development of the horse as an agricultural animal". The review is worth reading and has merit. It accurately reflects what happened during The Great Horse Harness Debate. http://harness-review.mysite.wanadoo-members.co.uk/ DSH Lux et Veritas et Libertas Vires et Honor "Larry Swain" <theswain@operamail.com> wrote in message news:oPudnZjWUq-q5SPcRVn-1Q@rcn.net... | David Read wrote: | > "Paul J Gans" <gans@panix.com> wrote in message | > news:cpkfet$nd2$1@reader1.panix.com... | > | >>I want to thank David for the review. The reference to | >>the article is not quite right. The publisher is Ashgate, | >>not Avista. | > | > Ah. Thanks for the correction. There are a few other punctuation and syntax | > glitches and errors that need sorting out as well. | | As an aside, that is one thing that has really angered me about Ashgate | Books the last few years. I pay a hefty price for them, but the last 3 | I've purchased have had these kind of errors....for the price I pay, I'd | expect better editing on their part. No slight on Paul intended... | | >>Sadly, the edition is very small. I can't post the chapter | >>because Ashgate owns the copyright -- though it will revert | >>to me in a year or so when the volume goes out of print. | >> | >>The book is also outrageously expensive, $99 US. | >> | >>I'm glad that at least one copy made it into the hands of | >>someone interested in the subject. | > | > German universities have to spend their potloads of money | > somewhere... | > | > -- | > | > cheers, | > | > David Read > David Read is talking about HIS OWN punctuation, grammar and syntax > errors in the REVIEW at the website -- not Gans's errors in his ARTICLE > in an Ashgate BOOK, which we have not seen. Quite so. > Do read more closely. > [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > horse harness" in the "development of the horse as an agricultural > animal". Thanks. Corrections now made - just hope I've caught them all! > The review is worth reading and has merit. It accurately reflects what > happened during The Great Horse Harness Debate. > > http://harness-review.mysite.wanadoo-members.co.uk/ Thankyou. And, as you said, it is not definitive. Far from it. The limitations imposed by the fact of it being a review of someone else's work mean that it was not intended to be definitive in any case. -- cheers, David Read | Thankyou. And, as you said, it is not definitive. Far from it. The | limitations imposed by the fact of it being a review of someone else's | work mean that it was not intended to be definitive in any case. [DR] You're quite welcome. Yes, point taken -- but the points your review DOES make are telling -- particularly these: -------------------------- "He needed to have compared the development of medieval agricultural practices and techniques with the agricultural practices and techniques of the Roman world in order to have made his arguments compelling." "Instead, he has focused upon medieval agriculture and Roman road transportation, and practically ignored developments in both Roman agriculture and medieval road transportation." "His understanding of medieval agriculture is mostly confined to that of north-west Europe, and, wherever he addresses the other issues, he shows very little understanding or knowledge of what was going on elsewhere, be it to do with agriculture or road transport, in either a Roman or a medieval context." "Where he has ventured beyond the Middle Ages and into the modern era he is vague in analysis and often incorrect in his facts." "The essay as a whole is short on facts and sparse with dates, as well as being loose and inexact in interpretation...." David Read --------------------- DSH Lux et Veritas et Libertas Vires et Honor | > David Read is talking about HIS OWN punctuation, grammar and syntax | > errors in the REVIEW at the website -- not Gans's errors in his [quoted text clipped - 27 lines] | | David Read > David Read is talking about HIS OWN punctuation, grammar and syntax > errors in the REVIEW at the website -- not Gans's errors in his ARTICLE > in an Ashgate BOOK, which we have not seen. > > Do read more closely. Yes please do. Do the words "As an aside...." escape your notice? If not, there is no reason for these comments. > There is one grammatical error in the first sentence of the first > paragraph of the review: [quoted text clipped - 50 lines] > | > > | > David Read "Perhaps the most curious features of Gans's essay to anyone familiar with either these debates and/or the web article "Roman Traction Systems" are the author's almost complete disregard of the evidence provided by Weller et al., and his failure to address many of the points of difference that were raised. That some of his arguments and his conclusions, but not his evidence, reflect much of what was originally provided in these debates by Weller, et al., in debate with Gans's own original position and that of Jean Gimpel is nowhere acknowledged and this, although notable, is not in the least surprising." David Read --------------------- Could you please give us some examples of this? Are you saying that Gans simply ignores much of the evidence and the points raised by Weller but somehow simultaneously adopts several of her arguments and conclusions -- with no reference to HER evidence -- and without any reference to Dr. Weller herself? DSH Lux et Veritas et Libertas Vires et Honor "The fact is that A. H. M. Jones, the leading 20th century historian of the Later Roman Empire, says that ox-wagons of the cursus publicus were limited by legislation in the loads they could haul. The fact is that Ann Hyland, one of the leading writers on the history of the horse, agrees with him. They need to be rebutted, not ignored. David Read --------------------- That is where things stand at present. David Read is quite correct. DSH Lux et Veritas et Libertas Vires et Honor "Beyond that [sic] I see no point in an extended repeat of an extended discussion, even in a single newsgroup, of a paper only two of us have seen." P. Jonathan Gans ------------------------ THAT, of course, is NOT the issue. THAT is a Red Herring. THIS is the issue, which Gans is trying to ignore and dismiss.... And it is NOT in any way a REPEAT, much less an "extended repeat". DSH ------------------------- "The fact is that A. H. M. Jones, the leading 20th century historian of the Later Roman Empire, says that ox-wagons of the cursus publicus were limited by legislation in the loads they could haul. The fact is that Ann Hyland, one of the leading writers on the history of the horse, agrees with him. They need to be rebutted, not ignored. David Read --------------------- That is where things stand at present in this discussion. David Read is quite correct. DSH Lux et Veritas et Libertas Vires et Honor Recte: "Beyond that [sic] I see no point in an extended repeat of an extended discussion, even in a single newsgroup, of a paper only two of us have seen." P. Jonathan Gans ------------------------ THAT, of course, is NOT the issue. THAT is a Red Herring. THIS is the issue, which Gans is trying to ignore and dismiss.... And it is NOT in any way a REPEAT, much less an "extended repeat": DSH ------------------------- "The fact is that A. H. M. Jones, the leading 20th century historian of the Later Roman Empire, says that ox-wagons of the cursus publicus were limited by legislation in the loads they could haul. The fact is that Ann Hyland, one of the leading writers on the history of the horse, agrees with him. They need to be rebutted, not ignored." David Read --------------------- That is where things stand at present in this discussion. David Read is quite correct. DSH Lux et Veritas et Libertas Vires et Honor | Because the subject has come up every now and then in this group, I | have scanned the essay "The Medieval Horse Harness: Revolution or | Evolution? A Case Study in Technological Change" and put it online. I | very much enjoyed reading it, and I hope it will be helpful to the | group: http://www.angelfire.com/tx6/gans/gans04.pdf | Happy new year to everyone. --------------------------- Happy New Year, Indeed! Well, that certainly solves any alleged pogueish problems of access to Gans's article. The Great Horse Harness Debate can now begin again in earnest -- since we ALL have access to the article -- NOT just David Read. Deeeeelightful! As Theodore Roosevelt would say. ---- DSH DSH Lux et Veritas et Libertas Vires et Honor |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2009 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.