Re: [SystemSafety] Short news article on Fukushima Dai-ichi and Risk

From: Dick Selwood < >
Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2014 21:58:46 +0000

There are no myths about Alfred's burial- it is well documented (Alfred is not Arthur he said condescendingly)

Alfred was buried in the Old Minster in 899, then a few years later was transferred to the New Minster, almost certainly built to serve, in part as a Royal Mausoleum like St Denis in Paris.

In 1110, his body, along with his wife's and his son's was moved to Hyde Abbey.

Hyde Abbey was dissolved by Henry VIII in 1539

The bones may have been scattered in 1788.

I am not terminally un-impressed but I am p---d off with people making a drama out of something that is interesting but adds nothing to the historical record

On 24/01/2014 20:13, Peter Bernard Ladkin wrote:
>> On 24 Jan 2014, at 17:37, Dick Selwood <dick_at_xxxxxx >>
>> Peter- Why is this a wonderful find?
> Because there are divergent myths as to where Alfred may be, and why, and this find substantiates some and rules out others.
>> The reason I ask is that the reaction to the story strikes me as not dissimilar to public reaction to an accident.
> Well, of course it is an accident. If it wasn't an accident it wouldn't be a wonderful find. Oh, you mean one of *those* accidents. Well, I dunno. Tell me, is it part of the Winchester psyche to be terminally unimpressed? :-)
>>> On 22/01/2014 10:28, Peter Bernard Ladkin wrote:
>>> ..... People have been searching for Alfred's remains for hundreds of years; this is a wonderful find.
> Prof. Peter Bernard Ladkin, University of Bielefeld and Causalis Limited
> -----
> No virus found in this message.
> Checked by AVG -
> Version: 2014.0.4259 / Virus Database: 3681/7030 - Release Date: 01/24/14

The System Safety Mailing List
systemsafety_at_xxxxxx Received on Fri Jan 24 2014 - 22:59:32 CET

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Tue Jun 04 2019 - 21:17:06 CEST