Talk:Henry Maundrell

Weird sentence
"The descriptions were constantly refered to passages in the Bible, and encounters with greedy local Ottoman officials confirmed Maundrell in his distaste for the local inhabitants."

What;s the source for this statement? It seems strange that Maundrell would dislike the locals due to his interactions with Ottoman imperial authorities. They were not one in the same. The locals were Arabs (now Palestinians, Lebanese, Syrians, etc.) and the Ottomans were Turks. Was he so ignorant that he did not know the difference between them?  T i a m u t talk 01:28, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Click on the footnote links, where you'll find your answers. That's something you might have done beforehand. The tone of Maundrell's book can be judged from the Saudi Aramco World article— but only if it's been glanced at. Perhaps Maundrell's Journey should be extensively quoted. --Wetman (talk) 13:25, 10 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Snippy today, aren't we? I did read the Aramco text. I don't see anything thay says that his "encounters with greedy local Ottoman officials confirmed Manudrell in his distaste for the local inhabitants." That seems to be a WP:SYNTH of your own making.
 * What the text does say is that there is in his writings "an irritation toward the language and customs of those countries he visited" that reflects the circumstances he was is. I.e. his poor health and his being "a Protestant in a land openly hostile to and contemptuous of Christians, and in which the outlook of other Christians was completely different from his own." The word "greedy" isn't anywhere in the text and the anecdote about the Ottoman officials isn't linked by the author to the irritated tone in his writings. You did that.
 * Will you change the text accordingly to reflect this? Or shall I?  T i a m u t talk 14:21, 10 December 2008 (UTC)


 * I see the sentence still remains as it is. Do you have another source that supports your formulation? Or should it be changed per the source above?  T i a m u t talk 13:05, 18 December 2008 (UTC)


 * "In view of Maundrell's situation at the time of the pilgrimage it would have been extraordinary had certain unfavorable reactions not been reflected in his writing... He was a Protestant in a land openly hostile to and contemptuous of Christians, and in which the outlook of other Christians was completely different from his own. These circumstances are reflected in an irritation toward the language and customs of those countries he visited." (Howell, Daniel. "The Journey Of Henry Maundrell." Saudi Aramco World, July/August 1964.)


 * I'm disappointed that such a responsible and genuinely curious Wikipedian editor did not bother to look at this reference.--Wetman (talk) 15:06, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

Separate squares
Does this just not mean they all lived in the factory compound, which was locked up at night? I'm not sure this amounts to "monastic seclusion" - which would be an odd way to run a trading station. Johnbod (talk) 10:33, 10 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Iron gates locked them in at night. There were no women among them, and no locals inside. What is so un-monastic abou this, save that they weren't literally monks, and what was not secluded about their situation?--Wetman (talk) 13:29, 10 December 2008 (UTC)