User talk:Tuckerresearch/Talk Archive 2007


Coronelli

Hi. no problem for me to understand English... It's another story with my writings... Let's try... The point about the Mississippi river is that René Robert Cavelier de La Salle lied about it to put more interest in those lands. I dont know the details of that story, but I read somehing about that. La Salle knew that those globes will be show to Louis XIV, and he wanted to show more interest in those lands. René Robert Cavelier de La Salle was just coming back from America when he draw this map for the Marly globe. It's not a mistake, it's a form of "propaganda". I don't know if I'm understable... Nevermind, let me know. This globe is a real beauty. and the celest one, ever better... a must see! And France was so afraid to loose them, that they spent more times hiden in caves than show in public.

Vincenzo Coronelli is a very important map and globe maker and I have some books about him at home. What do you want to know about him? I can also ask questions to guys who everything about Vicenzo. I know two of the three (the third one has die) map makers who were involved in the 1980 restauration work. Just ask, they know everything about Vicenzo. Sorry for my very poor English... Clio64B 05:06, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

The article I read about that point was also pointing a misused of the Longitude but for the "propaganda" affair, he was pointing that La Salle needed big money to "colonize" (and not just discover and claim) that land, and Louis XIV was the only one to convince about that. So the article pointed that La Salle may have lie just to put more interest in that land to raise money from Louis XIV to colonize the land. I will try to find the exact record of that article. I just read little things about the problem of the map of Mississippi, and [1] point the fact that the Mississippi map of the Marly Globes was also based on stolen english maps. Clio64B 06:31, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

Re: David Rohl

Er, those external links were not "wantonly removed": 2 were to mailling lists that require a membership to access (I think that we don't need to link to members-only mailling lists), & the other I removed at the reuqest of David Rohl himself. While I told him I wouldn't restore the link if someone else removed it, you may be hearing from him in the near future via email. He is polite, now has an idea of how Wikipedia works, so just be civil & the exchange ought to go well. -- llywrch 19:33, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

Okay, I guess the word "wantonly" bugged me a little, so thanks for the apology. I'm sorry to hear about his website: I found it very informative. Maybe we could link to it via the Internet Archive. However, expect to hear from Rohl about that link: he clearly does not like it & considers it slanderous to him. -- llywrch 19:44, 18 March 2007 (UTC)