The "take-away" from all this is that any historical document has to be parsed in a multitude of ways. It goes without saying that there in inbuilt bias. In my profession, archaeology, youc can put 10 archaeologists in a room and get 12 opinions as to what something is, much less what it means. I would feel a tad torqued if someone slammed my profession and might be inclined to respond to point out that divergent viewpoints coming from the inherent biases of individuals are not the exclusive domain of any one profession, as Jeff Southmayd did, if one parsed his statement (but then, that's my biased interpretation;).

Anyone can read a document and come away with what they determine to be the meaning, but as Yogi Berra said, "You can see a lot by looking", once you've looked over them as a professional, you become only too aware of the problems. Experience counts.

Lyle Browning


On Dec 10, 2012, at 3:19 PM, Johnson, Kirk N. wrote:

> It was only one person, who chose to remain anonymous, who slandered all
> attorneys. Not sure why you thought it was necessary to respond in kind.
> 
> Kirk Johnson
> Graduate Student, GMU
> Librarian, Prince William County Public Library System
> 


______________________________________
To subscribe, change options, or unsubscribe please see the instructions at
http://listlva.lib.va.us/archives/va-hist.html