Comments on: Jolly ol’England

By: Archaeozoo

Archaeozoo — Sun, 30 Mar 2008 08:03:53 +0000

Old maps are fascinating. I believe I may have seen a similar map to Aaron, although the one I saw was more of a T-shape with Jerusalem in the centre.

By: the real cenedl mf

the real cenedl mf — Thu, 27 Mar 2008 21:53:36 +0000

HP: “the necessary mental attitude you need to have toward truth claims in old books comes in very handy when reading today’s newspaper”this is still true of every bit of printed matter–take the current revisionism trend in school textbooks for example;-) If we read those books, we get the clear sense through both printed words AND photographs, that white men are clearly all racist ( despite the fact that they have propelled Obama to an imminent victory) andeven though they were often most closely associated with civil rights and freedom rides.Women have always been oppressed, especially the white women of Queen Victoria’s era( who were ‘treated’ only slightly worse than todays Smith College graduates_)–they were treated ‘nearly worse’ than black slaves, because ‘black’slaves had chains, while white, Victorian women were ‘forced to wear coprsets!’, etc…*puking now*I suspect that if it is true that the celts could ask for biscuits ant booze everywhere in that version of the world, it is Victorian era England turning a subtle nose up, just like we do today over working class, or hip-hop slang…. “I gotta go get me some eats, man…”

By: Aaron Golas

Aaron Golas — Thu, 27 Mar 2008 20:55:24 +0000

I once saw an ancient Map of the World that had Jerusalem as the center of the world, and depicted Europe, Africa, and Asia as three clover leaves branching out from the Holy Land.

By: Greg Laden

Greg Laden — Thu, 27 Mar 2008 20:50:52 +0000

I’m glad to see there is such an interest in these books. When I first put that post up, many months ago, there was little reaction.It happens that I have a modest collection of dusty old books like this one (maybe 100 or so volumes). Perhaps I will now start blogging them.I was just reading Haldane and Husley’s biology textbook last night …. it is absolutely true that some of the best science writing is not the new science writing….

By: andy

andy — Thu, 27 Mar 2008 19:01:21 +0000

When I was a kid I had a book on Exploration with a series of plates of the world from the Stone Age on… the world was shown in shadow, except Europe, then the bright colors spread out, first the Vikings, then Columbus…every few centuries a little more lit up.And this must have been published in the 1970s at least.

By: guthrie

guthrie — Thu, 27 Mar 2008 18:39:37 +0000

I’ve found that many old science textbooks explain things in more detail, depth and more clearly. It helps that they don’t have to be “popular”, but also the writing is generally of a high standard, albeit old fashioned. Plus 100 years ago you could have small 100 page book devoted entirely to electromagnetics because that was literally all they knew about it then, and you could cover it all in a small space. Now I suppose you’d need a 400 page textbook.Egineering ones have perhaps changed less in structure, although the exact topics change every few decades as new materials come along and more is found out about various topics. The old ones I have have a great deal about anything from steam boilers to flanges, but nowadays you need to know more about PLC’s and wiring to sensors.

By: HP

HP — Thu, 27 Mar 2008 18:21:21 +0000

I worry that I might accidentally learn something that is no longer true.As a reader of old books myself, I find that the necessary mental attitude you need to have toward truth claims in old books comes in very handy when reading today's newspaper.

By: Skemono

Skemono — Thu, 27 Mar 2008 18:10:21 +0000

I love reading the science beliefs from a hundred years ago or more. It's fantastic.

By: Paul Robinson

Paul Robinson — Thu, 27 Mar 2008 17:53:59 +0000

And Long May She Reign.

By: guthrie

guthrie — Thu, 27 Mar 2008 17:49:09 +0000

Peter- I seem to recall some silly TV program popularised that idea but I do not recall it actually having any traction amongst genealogists, heralds and those in the know as it were. Besides, given the intermarriage over the years James the 6th probably had a better claim than anyone else anyway, and lets not forget the wars of the Roses.Oh yes, and what gets up mynose is it shouldn’t be Elizabeth the 2nd at all. She is only Elizabeth the second of some place called England. When it comes to the UK, she is the first Elizabeth.