Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Eleana
PS: And bytheway, it is in fact very uncommon that a historian cannot read historical documents himself and has to rely on translations, transporting one error into the next. At least I don't know any serious historian who studied Medieval England, Ancient Greece, or Rome who could not read the language of the culture which he studied.
|
Well said, Eleana.
Note what Dr. John Lorne Campbell, a Gaelic learner who became one of our finest Gaelic scholars, said in the preface to his Highland Songs of the Forty-Five (The Scottish Gaelic Texts Society -1984): "The fact that the Gaelic language was officially proscribed, and unknown outside the Highlands, made it an easy matter for hostile propagandists to misrepresent the motives and malign the character of the Highlanders."
Also, in the introduction, he says: "It is indeed strange that although the [FortyFive] Rising has been the subject of a great deal of discussion and research, no real attempt has ever been made to discover what were the actual sentiments of the ordinary Highlanders who formed the backbone of the Prince`s army...In Scotland...partisan writers have always been wont to describe the Highlanders as barbarous in manners and uncouth in speech. This propaganda, which is of a type now familiar to many of us, soon crystallised into an accepted opinion, adopted by most Scottish (and practically all English) historians, who have been almost without exception ignorant of the language of the people whom thy condemned. It is astonishing in any case that any historian should feel himself properly equipped to write the history of his country while remaining in ignorance of the language spoken over half its area. It is through these circumstances that a tradition has been created which still has its popular following, and whose destruction is part of the purpose of this book."