From: <gilesoakley@tiscali.co.uk> > Well, Roy, I stand put in my place. I'm sorry you think I 'don't really > understand history', although I'd put it another way. I'm afraid I simply > don't share your cosy UKIP-style bluff Yorkshireman saloon bar right wing > views on these matters, where complex matters are reduced to risible > comparisons. However, I notice you use the term word 'sins of the past' in > relation to slavery, which to my untutored eye suggests there were 'sinners' > too. Once you concede that principal, it does suggest somewhere along the > line feelings of shame or guilt might be at the very least comprehensible, > if not obligatory. > > It's only natural, I would think, that some people take some vicarious pride > in their ancestors' achievements, however little personal credit they can > take from them. I've no doubt the descendants of Winston Churchill are proud > of the Old Man and likewise I'd be very chuffed if I was related to > Wilberforce, or to Martin Luther King, or any number of fighters for > justice. The reverse side of that impulse is for people to feel bad when > they discover they have perpetrators of evil in their family tree. What's > wrong with that? Why would it be 'political correctness' ('gone mad'?) to > feel empathetic guilt.> ...Rest snipped... It's utter twaddle to suggest that anyone alive today should feel guilt, vicarious or otherwise, over something one of their ancestors did, including an involvement in the slave trade. As it happens, I am a very distant kinsman of Sir Ernest Shackleton, the Antarctic explorer. We both descend from a marriage at Keighley, Yorkshire, in 1581, but I don't make a big thing about it. On another line, my research suggests that I may be very remotely connected via a marriage to a very wicked woman called Mary Bateman who was hanged at York in 1809 for murder. She was a poisoner and probably killed more people than she was hanged for. I have turned it into a lecture that I give to societies! BTW, could I respectfully suggest that you learn the difference between "principal" and "principle"? This would seem to be one of the more common errors in the English language today! Principal is defined as something or somone who is the head of something or in charge of it. Principle means a belief or tenet of faith. I think it was the latter you meant in your message. -- Roy Stockdill Genealogical researcher, writer & lecturer Famous family trees blog: http://blog.findmypast.co.uk/tag/roy-stockdill/ Reach For The Stars blog: roystockdillgenealogy.com "There is only one thing in the world worse than being talked about, and that is not being talked about." OSCAR WILDE

I haven't been following this thread closely today, but now I see that tempers are getting heated and perhaps people should walk away from this. We say things on the internet less tactfully than we would face to face; and because it's not face to face there is no Last Word to be had, and therefore no "winners." Also, it's not very nice to be around. -----Original Message----- From: bristol_and_somerset-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:bristol_and_somerset-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of roy.stockdill@btinternet.com Sent: 06 February 2014 21:09 To: bristol_and_somerset@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [B&S] Notebook reveals chilling insight into Bristol'sslavetrade - Bristol Post From: <gilesoakley@tiscali.co.uk> > Well, Roy, I stand put in my place. I'm sorry you think I 'don't > really understand history', although I'd put it another way. I'm > afraid I simply don't share your cosy UKIP-style bluff Yorkshireman > saloon bar right wing views on these matters, where complex matters > are reduced to risible comparisons. However, I notice you use the term > word 'sins of the past' in relation to slavery, which to my untutored eye suggests there were 'sinners' > too. Once you concede that principal, it does suggest somewhere along > the line feelings of shame or guilt might be at the very least > comprehensible, if not obligatory. > > It's only natural, I would think, that some people take some vicarious > pride in their ancestors' achievements, however little personal credit > they can take from them. I've no doubt the descendants of Winston > Churchill are proud of the Old Man and likewise I'd be very chuffed if > I was related to Wilberforce, or to Martin Luther King, or any number > of fighters for justice. The reverse side of that impulse is for > people to feel bad when they discover they have perpetrators of evil > in their family tree. What's wrong with that? Why would it be > 'political correctness' ('gone mad'?) to feel empathetic guilt.> ...Rest snipped... It's utter twaddle to suggest that anyone alive today should feel guilt, vicarious or otherwise, over something one of their ancestors did, including an involvement in the slave trade. As it happens, I am a very distant kinsman of Sir Ernest Shackleton, the Antarctic explorer. We both descend from a marriage at Keighley, Yorkshire, in 1581, but I don't make a big thing about it. On another line, my research suggests that I may be very remotely connected via a marriage to a very wicked woman called Mary Bateman who was hanged at York in 1809 for murder. She was a poisoner and probably killed more people than she was hanged for. I have turned it into a lecture that I give to societies! BTW, could I respectfully suggest that you learn the difference between "principal" and "principle"? This would seem to be one of the more common errors in the English language today! Principal is defined as something or somone who is the head of something or in charge of it. Principle means a belief or tenet of faith. I think it was the latter you meant in your message. -- Roy Stockdill Genealogical researcher, writer & lecturer Famous family trees blog: http://blog.findmypast.co.uk/tag/roy-stockdill/ Reach For The Stars blog: roystockdillgenealogy.com "There is only one thing in the world worse than being talked about, and that is not being talked about." OSCAR WILDE ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to BRISTOL_AND_SOMERSET-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message ----- No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 2014.0.4259 / Virus Database: 3684/7066 - Release Date: 02/05/14 ----- No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 2014.0.4259 / Virus Database: 3684/7066 - Release Date: 02/05/14

Thanks for the correction on principal/ principle, a stupid slip born of haste, which will surely shame my posterity. As for it being 'twaddle' to feel vicarious guilt over anything, I'd just point out that I never said or implied that anyone 'should' feel such guilt, I merely say it's a natural response among some people who do feel that way, particularly, for example, if your present circumstances have been enriched by inheritance of great family wealth originally based on slavery. It's quite telling that many families try to cover up past connections to slavery, as in the case of the Oakleys, which suggests again that many people do spontaneously have uneasy feelings that go beyond distant regret. I don't think such responses are based on 'political correctness' or being left wing or liberal, and are certainly not mandatory, but they are very understandable. A 'colourful' tale of a poisoner in your family tree probably makes for entertaining material for talks, if that's the kind of thing you like, but there are few wider issues involved in the way there are with slavery. Whatever stand we take on reparations - and I would stress I have an open mind on the question and want to see it argued through sensibly - it's not an issue that's going to go away, that's for sure. BTW I'm impressed by your connection to Shakleton, which I rather envy. Much better than having some possible slavers in your ancestral roots, I assure you. Giles -----Original Message----- From: roy.stockdill@btinternet.com Sent: Thursday, February 06, 2014 9:09 PM To: bristol_and_somerset@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [B&S] Notebook reveals chilling insight intoBristol'sslavetrade - Bristol Post From: <gilesoakley@tiscali.co.uk> > Well, Roy, I stand put in my place. I'm sorry you think I 'don't really > understand history', although I'd put it another way. I'm afraid I simply > don't share your cosy UKIP-style bluff Yorkshireman saloon bar right wing > views on these matters, where complex matters are reduced to risible > comparisons. However, I notice you use the term word 'sins of the past' in > relation to slavery, which to my untutored eye suggests there were > 'sinners' > too. Once you concede that principal, it does suggest somewhere along the > line feelings of shame or guilt might be at the very least comprehensible, > if not obligatory. > > It's only natural, I would think, that some people take some vicarious > pride > in their ancestors' achievements, however little personal credit they can > take from them. I've no doubt the descendants of Winston Churchill are > proud > of the Old Man and likewise I'd be very chuffed if I was related to > Wilberforce, or to Martin Luther King, or any number of fighters for > justice. The reverse side of that impulse is for people to feel bad when > they discover they have perpetrators of evil in their family tree. What's > wrong with that? Why would it be 'political correctness' ('gone mad'?) to > feel empathetic guilt.> ...Rest snipped... It's utter twaddle to suggest that anyone alive today should feel guilt, vicarious or otherwise, over something one of their ancestors did, including an involvement in the slave trade. As it happens, I am a very distant kinsman of Sir Ernest Shackleton, the Antarctic explorer. We both descend from a marriage at Keighley, Yorkshire, in 1581, but I don't make a big thing about it. On another line, my research suggests that I may be very remotely connected via a marriage to a very wicked woman called Mary Bateman who was hanged at York in 1809 for murder. She was a poisoner and probably killed more people than she was hanged for. I have turned it into a lecture that I give to societies! BTW, could I respectfully suggest that you learn the difference between "principal" and "principle"? This would seem to be one of the more common errors in the English language today! Principal is defined as something or somone who is the head of something or in charge of it. Principle means a belief or tenet of faith. I think it was the latter you meant in your message. -- Roy Stockdill Genealogical researcher, writer & lecturer Famous family trees blog: http://blog.findmypast.co.uk/tag/roy-stockdill/ Reach For The Stars blog: roystockdillgenealogy.com "There is only one thing in the world worse than being talked about, and that is not being talked about." OSCAR WILDE ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to BRISTOL_AND_SOMERSET-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message