Re: Cascading errors at Buyers' "Royal Ark"



In medio alt.talk.royalty aperuit susuhanan@xxxxxxxxxxxxx os suum:
Francois R. Velde wrote:
In medio alt.talk.royalty aperuit susuhanan@xxxxxxxxxxxxx os suum:
Francois R. Velde wrote:
In medio alt.talk.royalty aperuit susuhanan@xxxxxxxxxxxxx os suum:
Francois R. Velde wrote:
In medio alt.talk.royalty aperuit susuhanan@xxxxxxxxxxxxx os suum:
Chris Bennett wrote:


Even though you cannot now publish your sources for certain statements, can
you trace the source for such statements in your own archives?

Indeed. I keep every scrap that comes my way.

Including the document where the Tecks and Battenbergs "used the word 'renounce'
point-black" in 1917, no doubt.

And what silly hobby-horse might you be on now, exactly?

Truthfulness.

You once asserted the Tecks and Battenbergs "used the word renounce point-black"
concerning their German titles and styles in 1917. As far as I know you never
retracted your claim, so I presume you stand by it. You could repeat the claim
and back it up, or repeat the claim but refuse to back it up, or you could revise
your claim. How you handle yourself in a case where the veracity of your claim
can be assessed directly is very helpful for the case (your website) where you
demand to be taken at your word.

Truthfulness from you? That is a laugh.

As far as I remember, I said that the Tecks and Battenbergs renounced
their titles.

In reply to that, some plonker piped up and said no, no, no. They
didn't renounce they relinquished!!!!!

Your recollections are quite imprecise, but with Google archives you will have
no trouble verifying what was said.

Not so, you simply have a great deal of difficulty understanding
English.

You said:
Not so, they used the word "renounce" point black."
(See http://groups.google.com/group/alt.talk.royalty/msg/9c99a530c75f9717)

You also said:
the renunciations were made and published in the London Gazette dated,
14th July 1917."
(see http://groups.google.com/group/alt.talk.royalty/msg/c49b415f5e790e20)

That is not a quotation from a document, now is it?

"They used the word "renounce" point black" is a statement by Mr Christopher
Buyers, a man who keeps every scrap that comes his way, that the Battenbergs and
Tecks used a specific word. Call that what you will, as long as you tell us
where "they" used the word "renounce".

It is a comment on
a document which then gives the date and reference where it can be
found, which the reader is quite capable of reading himself.

But as you well know, the document cannot to be found under the given date and
reference. The renunciations, if they exist, were never published. Nor does
any known document related to this matter use the word "renounce".

You also said:
the holders THEMSELVES abandoned, renounced, surrendered,
their titles THEMSELVES, albeit at the request of King George V, their
Sovereign. I have never claimed otherwise.
It may be useful for you to look at the London Gazette for June 1917.
You will see the renunciations/relinquishments by the people concerned.
(see http://groups.google.com/group/alt.talk.royalty/msg/60b5ab5e39ced493)

Again, it refers the reader to the document, which he can read for
himself. The comment, ins't a direct quotation of the document, is it?

But no such document exists in the London Gazette for June 1917, or for any
other date.

I can understand this nonsensical post of yours if I had quoted the
text and inserted the word "renounce" in place of the text, or had not
given the reference at all. But I did neither. Inserting text that
isn't there, into quotations of actual documents is one of your
practices (e.g. Queen Victoria "of Great Britain and *Northern"
Ireland").

My practice is to acknowledge my mistakes as soon as they are pointed out, and
to offer original sources where possible. I acknowledged the mistake within 24
hours of it being pointed out, and I have provided anyone who wishes the
opportunity to see a photograph of the original document to which you refer.

Clearly, your practice is never to make mistakes, always to quote accurately and
always to provide correct references. So tell us, where did "they" use the word
"renounce"?

I wonder just what document signed Leopold of Battenberg, Alexander of
Battenberg, or Teck ("the holders THEMSELVES") you have actually read?

I have not, because there is no real need to do so.

So, tell us, how do you know that they used the word "renounce"?

The gazette makes
perfectly clear that the King gave them permission to drop their
titles. At later dates, when they were granted new British titles, the
entries clearly show that they had.

That is beside the point. Your assertion was that "they themselves renounced",
"they used the word renounce". So, tell us.
--
François Velde
velde@xxxxxxxxxx (replace by "heraldica")
Heraldry Site: http://www.heraldica.org/
.