Quote:
Originally Posted by Mort1997
Sorry Sir - will try harder in future
|
Yup - and to explain/continue, it's all about
references as opposed to
sources.
A little while ago I was reading an in-depth analysis of the life of King Charles II, dealing with/countering all the allegations made against him. In one case a previous author had carefully listed 47
references of him doing a certain thing. However in actual fact there were only two
SOURCES (both of them considered to be rather unreliable): ALL the other 45 were in fact just
references back to one of the two primary
sources.
As a scientist myself, just as any historian, genealogist, scientist etc. etc., we all know it is the
sources that provide the primary information.
Mort1997 is an excellent reference: his information is invaluable and I use it every week - the spoilers save an awful lot of wasted time - the point of my post upthread was that if (as now seems wrong) one or two have not been aware of the Endeavour newsletter, then that for them could be a primary source of that (and possibly more in-depth) information
Respect to Mort1997 then - for saving a lot of time when in a hurry
