An experiment

[GUT]

Yes, perhaps Pierre has got a poor memory for such things, possibly because he's so focused on his activities in the world of academia. Obviously this is something that I should make allowances for.

I've shown some of his posts on source criticism etc to REAL historians, some laughed, one shook his head I thought another was about to cry.

[John G]

I've shown some of his posts on source criticism etc to REAL historians, some laughed, one shook his head I thought another was about to cry.

Oh dear, what a surprise! It does, therefore, appear that Pierre may not be in the Premier Division of historians. Minor leagues perhaps? I mean, surely he ranks higher than, say, the equivalent of schoolboy championships!

[David Orsam]

Pierre's long post on the subject of "source criticism" is no more than advice (for numpties) on how to think critically about evidence. Criticial thinking can be done by absolutely anyone, it is not the exclusive preserve of an "academic historian". Such historian would be expected to have read all the relevant literature in his or her field of expertise and to have good knowledge of all the primary sources and their locations (and, in certain cases, might enjoy privileged access to primary sources restricted to others); they would also be expected to be rigorous in their historical analysis and know how to present their findings so that they can be properly assessed and tested but when it comes to solving 100 year old crimes of murder, an "academic historian" has no greater advantage over anyone else who has access to the relevant archives and documents, be it a former police detective, a journalist or crime writer, a sociologist, a philosopher, a lawyer, a teacher, an undergraduate, a candlestick maker or road sweeper.

[wigngown]

His unassuming disposition never fails to impress.
Best regards.

[Mayerling]

I think Pierre is probably just a very modest character, as can be clearly discerned from his posts. Moreover, when I asked him about his qualifications some time ago he mentioned a Masters in sociology, with a specific interest in probability, but completely neglected to mention his much more relevant history qualification, presumably not wishes to boast about it

Hi John G.

When you made the opening statement I kept thinking about what Winston Churchill once said (slightly friendly) about rival Clement Attlee: "He's a modest gentleman...with much to be modest about!" However to be fair to both Attlee and Pierre, Attlee, "the modest gentleman" turned out to be able to beat Churchill in the 1945 election and replace him (for six years) as Prime Minister - not a mean feat by any means. Pierre may still surprise us and trump us all (although given the word "trump" these days, that too has a double meaning); he may produce the actual identity of "Jack the Ripper". And perhaps tomorrow I may stumble on the wreck of the "Waratah". Anything is possible.

I'm sorry to say that my own suspicion is that Pierre's reticence (really repeat reticence or purposeful ignorance) of our requests for his scholarly works is the concurrent realization that if he gave us a listing of published works by himself and their locations in learned magazines, journals, etc., we might also uncover...shall I suggest embarrassing side issues like learned critiques about what he wrote by his peers in his areas of so-called expertise. One thing if we criticize him, without knowing him and his works, is that we are striking blindly at him, and can't hurt. it's sort of like the old childish nursery statement, "Sticks and stones may break my bones, but words will never hurt me!!" But if we did know the truth, we would be able to possibly dismiss him and his enquiries all the faster. At least that would be the risk he faces. I'm not so certain at times if he is thoroughly deserving of such a risk, but he comes close to it at other times.

If it would help him to reconsider his position, I have been writing (really not for a long time) since the late 1980s, and I find that many of my ideas don't bear consideration in the wake of better researched writings. It happens. How much of somebody like Herodotus is totally accepted anymore (some of his stories about peoples in the ancient world are really tall tales, and the father of History Writing has also been called the father of lies!). But his account of the Graeco-Persian Wars is still a major accomplishment.

Comm'on Pierre - take a chance and let's see some of your better regarded scholarly writings and where they are located.

Jeff

[Errata]

Hi John G.

When you made the opening statement I kept thinking about what Winston Churchill once said (slightly friendly) about rival Clement Attlee: "He's a modest gentleman...with much to be modest about!" However to be fair to both Attlee and Pierre, Attlee, "the modest gentleman" turned out to be able to beat Churchill in the 1945 election and replace him (for six years) as Prime Minister - not a mean feat by any means. Pierre may still surprise us and trump us all (although given the word "trump" these days, that too has a double meaning); he may produce the actual identity of "Jack the Ripper". And perhaps tomorrow I may stumble on the wreck of the "Waratah". Anything is possible.

I'm sorry to say that my own suspicion is that Pierre's reticence (really repeat reticence or purposeful ignorance) of our requests for his scholarly works is the concurrent realization that if he gave us a listing of published works by himself and their locations in learned magazines, journals, etc., we might also uncover...shall I suggest embarrassing side issues like learned critiques about what he wrote by his peers in his areas of so-called expertise. One thing if we criticize him, without knowing him and his works, is that we are striking blindly at him, and can't hurt. it's sort of like the old childish nursery statement, "Sticks and stones may break my bones, but words will never hurt me!!" But if we did know the truth, we would be able to possibly dismiss him and his enquiries all the faster. At least that would be the risk he faces. I'm not so certain at times if he is thoroughly deserving of such a risk, but he comes close to it at other times.

If it would help him to reconsider his position, I have been writing (really not for a long time) since the late 1980s, and I find that many of my ideas don't bear consideration in the wake of better researched writings. It happens. How much of somebody like Herodotus is totally accepted anymore (some of his stories about peoples in the ancient world are really tall tales, and the father of History Writing has also been called the father of lies!). But his account of the Graeco-Persian Wars is still a major accomplishment.

Comm'on Pierre - take a chance and let's see some of your better regarded scholarly writings and where they are located.

Jeff

He doesn't seem to be a bit too young to be published to you? It's not a dig. We were all once too young to be published, and some of us who are fully old enough are still unpublished for a host of reasons. But he seems young. Maybe it's a syntax thing.

[Pcdunn]

He doesn't seem to be a bit too young to be published to you? It's not a dig. We were all once too young to be published, and some of us who are fully old enough are still unpublished for a host of reasons. But he seems young. Maybe it's a syntax thing.

I get the impression he could be a very smart graduate student, degreed fairly recently, but that is only opinion...

[Elamarna]

I get the impression he could be a very smart graduate student, degreed fairly recently, but that is only opinion...

maybe not yet even

steve

[Elamarna]

work by academic historian

Pierre seems to claim that a work on the Whitechaplel murders by an Academic Historian will be superior to a work by a non academic historian.

I have decided to give him one.

The book in question I have had for a few years. and while only a small section of it deals with the killings it is a Ripper book.

The Fox and the Flies pub 2008

Professor Charles van Onselen- University of Pretoria.

Unfortunately this is a suspect book, and despite being from a renowned Historian, it is no more convincing than books by non historians.

so there you are Pierre, what you asked for?

Can you now please tell me of your own publications or peer reviewed ariticle/papers


steve

[Mayerling]

He doesn't seem to be a bit too young to be published to you? It's not a dig. We were all once too young to be published, and some of us who are fully old enough are still unpublished for a host of reasons. But he seems young. Maybe it's a syntax thing.

I'm giving Pierre the benefit of the doubt that his age is between 23 and 35 years, and probably closer to the 30s (as he is married). The syntax business is a minor problem, as we all make mistakes in our writings. I cringe at mine when I notice I left out a verb or misused an adjective.

Jeff

[GUT]

I'm giving Pierre the benefit of the doubt that his age is between 23 and 35 years, and probably closer to the 30s (as he is married). The syntax business is a minor problem, as we all make mistakes in our writings. I cringe at mine when I notice I left out a verb or misused an adjective.

Jeff

I am also prepared to assume English may not be his first language as an explanation.

[DJA]

I get the impression he could be a very smart graduate student, degreed fairly recently, but that is only opinion...

Prolly a 13 year old using his parents' computer or one of those permanently unemployed uni students living on Gov't handouts.

Very smart.....ROFL.

Only people dumber are those who regularly feed and encourage him.

FAIL!

[wigngown]

I've often thought that GUT. Perhaps the meaning of some of Pierre's posts are misinterpreted in translation. Certainly, some of the phraseology used would indicate that English isn't his first language.
Best regards.

[Elamarna]

I've often thought that GUT. Perhaps the meaning of some of Pierre's posts are misinterpreted in translation. Certainly, some of the phraseology used would indicate that English isn't his first language.
Best regards.

wigngown,

that is certainly true, actually in his early posts last year, he did make this clear.
He obviously feels a compulsion to communicate as shown by 1596 posts and 48 separate threads in 231 days , and there was a break of several weeks in that as well.

However he always gets his points across, even if many do not agree with them. if you have had the pleasure of receiving a private message from him, which by definition are often less formal than a post to the general forum, he still makes his points very clearly.

I tend to feel there is little misinterpretation of his posts.

all the best

Steve

[wigngown]

Steve,

Thanks for clarifying. I've never had the pleasure of receiving a PM from Pierre. He certainly has a compulsion! Pierre is vociferous in arguing his theories & I do enjoy reading the posts between you, David & Pierre as being new to these boards I learn quite a lot from them. In fact these boards are a hive of information.

Best regards.