migovie
04-08-2009, 05:51 AM
golly im sooooo impressed that patrick thomson has now placed some belief in the writings of sherrif dugald..
its SUCH a relief...
Cos you all know that previously both patrick and edward dugald mactavish had held so much distrust in all sherrif dugald believed in.
Both edward dugald and patrick have proved for enternity in mactavish history that neither of them held any respect for sherrif dugald nor his beliefs and further more they held no belief in lachlan mactavishs understanding of mactavish history either.
WHY you ask.?
Now the following facts will prove to all who read them just what a swindle and twist of historical facts and docs is being conducted by the mactavish clan .
Recently patrick posted some letters from sherrif dugald and exhibits these for all to read as proof that the sherrif was chief of mactavish.
I say sherrif was wrong .
patrick will say the letters prove the opposite.
I say ....well patrick publish the remainder of sherrif dugalds letters written at the same time.
These are the letters you have spat on and gone to lyons office and demanded the mactavish arms be changed. ?
In DIRECT contradiction to sherrif dugalds beliefs of mactavish history .
Patrick you and chief dugald have demanded that mactavish be seperated from campbell.
Yet sherrif dugald and lachlan write in letters that they have full understanding the mactavish are part of the campbell family.
Do you see the problem you have now created . ?
Today you present letters from sherrif dugald as evidence of concrete proof he was chief. Yet you spend mactavish clan funds and time ignoring those same letters in which simon mctavish and lachlan mctavish and sherrif dugald state plainly that they are descended from campbell.
My god what have you done ...???
Example..
in august 1796 mr ferrier prepared docs to "cede mr mctavishs claim on dunardry"
what does this mean.??
it means 4 weeks before lachlan died he relinquished his rights to dunardy .
18th december 1792 ....
simon mctavish writes to lachlan and states "i know we are descended from the campbells but how far we use the same arms i am at a loss"
and patrick say NO. he was wrong ...????
1st march 1845 ....
sherrif dugald states "at the time the mcivors and other branches of the argylle family dropped their patronomic distinctions and took the name of cambell"
what does this mean.???
this means that sherrif dugald states clearly and without dispute that our taus/tavish twin brother ivor was part of the family of argylle...
for one brother to be part of that family must include the other twin ..our tavish
Sherrif says his grandfather declined the request to change his name to campbell > This was an obvious option as argylle made a "request" not a demand.
Dunardry refusal was an exhibit of choice in the matter . The refusal for mactavish to change name to campbell was NEVER on the grounds that they werent campbell family it was simply refused cos they desired to., and mactavish had that choice.
Of course we also have sherrif dugald stating that the campbell tartan of the 42nd was the tartan that should be basis of the entire family (campbell family) of which he was a part.
but patrick and edward say NO sherrif dugald was a fool and had no idea of mactavish history...to the point the mactavish clan in recent years asked for new arms proving seperation from campbell...
such distrust in the writings of sherrif dugald eh ...
OH...and this all conducted recently by the same men that now post sherrif dugalds letters and ask you all to believe every word written in them ?
dont worry it gets worse...
same letter sherrif dugald states his grandfather was asked to change his name to campbell. Then sherrif says his grandfather was the "the only member of the family retaining the patronomic of my race."
what does this mean ??
when sherrif dugald says "the family" he is talking of the campbell greater family and he is stating mactavish was the only "subtribe" that had still retained its original name..
this proves without any doubt at all that sherrif dugald knew he was a campbell ...
and patrick and edward dugald so NO he was a fool and didnt know what he was talking about ...
yet they again show letters and ask you all to believe every word written by sherrif dugald as being correct.???hmmmm
###...shot yourself in the foot there a bit boys didnt you....####
so was it just sherrif dugald that had no idea what he was talking about re the mactavish /campbell connection.?
well ive already given you an extract from the letter of simon mctavish of garthbeg who in 1792 held no doubts we were descended from campbell...
lets look at lachlan mactavish ...
how did he feel about the history of mctavish?
before i quote his statement i must ask you all to realise the fact that in 1792 the mactavish history was still held intact father to son FAR more intact than today ..
so in 1793 26th feb .....
lachlan mctavish wrote to simon and stated
" acct of our decent from the family of argylle, proof of which you produce from charters as far back as 1500 now in my possesion"
what does this mean.?
that lachlan mactavish had NO doubt he was a campbell and STRANGELY that simon mctavish of garthbeg has supplied lachlan with mactavish ancient docs going back to 1500 that proved the dunardry descent from campbell...hmmmmmmmmm
NO DOUBT AT ALL
yet again..edward dugald mctavish and patrick etc now pee on those mens beliefs .
So i give you 100% watertight proof without dispute that patrick thomson and edward dugald mctavish treated the letters and facts and writings of sherrif dugald mctavish as RUBBISH ...
they did not belive a word sherrif dugald wrote ...
to the point patrick and edward applied to lyons to have a new grant of mctavish arms that show seperation and no connection to campbell
my point being..
im not entering a debate about if we are campbell or not..im simply pointing out the stupidity of men that redicule sherrif dugalds belief then ask you to all read sherrif dugalds writings and treat it as a correct statement .
THEY HAVE TREATED SHERRIF DUGALD AS AN IDIOT ...
THEN ASK YOU TO BELIEVE EVERY WORD WRITTEN BY SHERRIF DUGALD...
WHAT ELSE COULD SHERRIF DUGALD BE WRONG ON THEN EH????
sherrif says he is from an unbroken line of succesion from taus.??
WRONG....he cannot ....history tells us the dunardry chiefs heir was slain and the survivor settled at garthbeg ..so that cannot be an unbroken line can it.it had to move to a cousin .
sherif knew he and his father "ceded" their claim to dunardry in 1796..
so sherrif did not hold any right to inherit...all that could have occured was sherrif placed a bid at auction which he won in 1820s...then he realised he had no way of paying then sold it on again befiore getting into debt yet again..
just as lachlan had signed a pledge to buy dunardry and couldnt afford to either ...like father like son...
heres a VERY strange point for you to consider...ealry 1800s sherrif dugald began building kilchrist castle...
today we are told he thought of himself as a chief..HMMMMM
just where in this kilchrist castle did sherrif dugald take the effort to place anything mactavish yet alone anything chiefly..
.no crests in the stonework ...
no boars heads in the gardens ...
no mactavish anything...
OH there was a pair of lions statues by the pond..(what exactly do lions have to do with mactavish ?)
come on guys...if he was chief at that time ...we would see his kilchrist castle adorned with chiefly goodies...
his son william does actually give the sherrif a title of respect in ONE letter ..he refers to sherrif as "the old laird of kilchrist"..thats all..
i do know he was broke..was in debt to his father in law for 7 years and couldnt pay a shilling off that debt...but you would see something mactavish or chiefly in that buildings stonework wouldnt you...??
something small even ...just to tell other persons that a chief lived there.??
NO ...NOTHING at all....
and since he was building that new house with the realisation it was all that was left as he had no 'dunardry" anymore and no hope of ever getting it back....
of well...this is historical proof he gave up...
in reality he didnt cos history tells us the last man to hold the titles and arms of dunardry was simon and sons
1796...lachlans family cede their rights to dunardry
1800 ...simon buys dunardy lands
1804 ...simon dies and leaves a watertight will that gives the rights to his lands of dunardry and arms ONLY to his male heirs FOREVER
1812 ...the duke of argylle declares simon mctavish and heir william mctavish as "being known as armiger of dunardry due to docs presented before me"
1812...lachlans family lawyer james ferrier declares the titles of dunardry are now in the family of simon mctavish
1818..william mctavish death notice titles him as "william mctavish of dunardry"
1818....simons daughter is described as "daughter of ther late simon mctavish of dunardry"
good night...
finally... patrick and edward dugald have , by their own actions , declared the writings of sherrif dugald to be "rubbish"
Then reinforced this when they turned their backs on everything written by sherif dugald re mctavish/campbell, and written also by lachlan and also by simon...
OUCH..then they had the balls to try and tell you all that the " new grant of mctavish corrected an ancient wrong made by lyons office"
THEY SHOULDVE BEEN MORE TRUTHFULL AND JUST SAID " WE THINK SHERRIF DUGALD WAS AN IDIOT AND WE ARE GOING TO LYONS TO CRAP ON EVERYTHING HE BELIEVED IN..."
BUT PATRICK SHOULD NOT BE AS STUPID AS TO NOW PRESENT LETTERS WRITTEN FROM SHERRIF DUGALD AND ASK YOU ALL TO BELIEVE THEM ...HE DOESNT...HE DIDNT ..HISTORY HAS PROVEN HE CRAPPED ON SHERRIF DUGALDS BELIEFS
....
more to come shortly ......more hist docs and facts then proof of the mactavish senachies twisting and disposal of those docs and facts .
its SUCH a relief...
Cos you all know that previously both patrick and edward dugald mactavish had held so much distrust in all sherrif dugald believed in.
Both edward dugald and patrick have proved for enternity in mactavish history that neither of them held any respect for sherrif dugald nor his beliefs and further more they held no belief in lachlan mactavishs understanding of mactavish history either.
WHY you ask.?
Now the following facts will prove to all who read them just what a swindle and twist of historical facts and docs is being conducted by the mactavish clan .
Recently patrick posted some letters from sherrif dugald and exhibits these for all to read as proof that the sherrif was chief of mactavish.
I say sherrif was wrong .
patrick will say the letters prove the opposite.
I say ....well patrick publish the remainder of sherrif dugalds letters written at the same time.
These are the letters you have spat on and gone to lyons office and demanded the mactavish arms be changed. ?
In DIRECT contradiction to sherrif dugalds beliefs of mactavish history .
Patrick you and chief dugald have demanded that mactavish be seperated from campbell.
Yet sherrif dugald and lachlan write in letters that they have full understanding the mactavish are part of the campbell family.
Do you see the problem you have now created . ?
Today you present letters from sherrif dugald as evidence of concrete proof he was chief. Yet you spend mactavish clan funds and time ignoring those same letters in which simon mctavish and lachlan mctavish and sherrif dugald state plainly that they are descended from campbell.
My god what have you done ...???
Example..
in august 1796 mr ferrier prepared docs to "cede mr mctavishs claim on dunardry"
what does this mean.??
it means 4 weeks before lachlan died he relinquished his rights to dunardy .
18th december 1792 ....
simon mctavish writes to lachlan and states "i know we are descended from the campbells but how far we use the same arms i am at a loss"
and patrick say NO. he was wrong ...????
1st march 1845 ....
sherrif dugald states "at the time the mcivors and other branches of the argylle family dropped their patronomic distinctions and took the name of cambell"
what does this mean.???
this means that sherrif dugald states clearly and without dispute that our taus/tavish twin brother ivor was part of the family of argylle...
for one brother to be part of that family must include the other twin ..our tavish
Sherrif says his grandfather declined the request to change his name to campbell > This was an obvious option as argylle made a "request" not a demand.
Dunardry refusal was an exhibit of choice in the matter . The refusal for mactavish to change name to campbell was NEVER on the grounds that they werent campbell family it was simply refused cos they desired to., and mactavish had that choice.
Of course we also have sherrif dugald stating that the campbell tartan of the 42nd was the tartan that should be basis of the entire family (campbell family) of which he was a part.
but patrick and edward say NO sherrif dugald was a fool and had no idea of mactavish history...to the point the mactavish clan in recent years asked for new arms proving seperation from campbell...
such distrust in the writings of sherrif dugald eh ...
OH...and this all conducted recently by the same men that now post sherrif dugalds letters and ask you all to believe every word written in them ?
dont worry it gets worse...
same letter sherrif dugald states his grandfather was asked to change his name to campbell. Then sherrif says his grandfather was the "the only member of the family retaining the patronomic of my race."
what does this mean ??
when sherrif dugald says "the family" he is talking of the campbell greater family and he is stating mactavish was the only "subtribe" that had still retained its original name..
this proves without any doubt at all that sherrif dugald knew he was a campbell ...
and patrick and edward dugald so NO he was a fool and didnt know what he was talking about ...
yet they again show letters and ask you all to believe every word written by sherrif dugald as being correct.???hmmmm
###...shot yourself in the foot there a bit boys didnt you....####
so was it just sherrif dugald that had no idea what he was talking about re the mactavish /campbell connection.?
well ive already given you an extract from the letter of simon mctavish of garthbeg who in 1792 held no doubts we were descended from campbell...
lets look at lachlan mactavish ...
how did he feel about the history of mctavish?
before i quote his statement i must ask you all to realise the fact that in 1792 the mactavish history was still held intact father to son FAR more intact than today ..
so in 1793 26th feb .....
lachlan mctavish wrote to simon and stated
" acct of our decent from the family of argylle, proof of which you produce from charters as far back as 1500 now in my possesion"
what does this mean.?
that lachlan mactavish had NO doubt he was a campbell and STRANGELY that simon mctavish of garthbeg has supplied lachlan with mactavish ancient docs going back to 1500 that proved the dunardry descent from campbell...hmmmmmmmmm
NO DOUBT AT ALL
yet again..edward dugald mctavish and patrick etc now pee on those mens beliefs .
So i give you 100% watertight proof without dispute that patrick thomson and edward dugald mctavish treated the letters and facts and writings of sherrif dugald mctavish as RUBBISH ...
they did not belive a word sherrif dugald wrote ...
to the point patrick and edward applied to lyons to have a new grant of mctavish arms that show seperation and no connection to campbell
my point being..
im not entering a debate about if we are campbell or not..im simply pointing out the stupidity of men that redicule sherrif dugalds belief then ask you to all read sherrif dugalds writings and treat it as a correct statement .
THEY HAVE TREATED SHERRIF DUGALD AS AN IDIOT ...
THEN ASK YOU TO BELIEVE EVERY WORD WRITTEN BY SHERRIF DUGALD...
WHAT ELSE COULD SHERRIF DUGALD BE WRONG ON THEN EH????
sherrif says he is from an unbroken line of succesion from taus.??
WRONG....he cannot ....history tells us the dunardry chiefs heir was slain and the survivor settled at garthbeg ..so that cannot be an unbroken line can it.it had to move to a cousin .
sherif knew he and his father "ceded" their claim to dunardry in 1796..
so sherrif did not hold any right to inherit...all that could have occured was sherrif placed a bid at auction which he won in 1820s...then he realised he had no way of paying then sold it on again befiore getting into debt yet again..
just as lachlan had signed a pledge to buy dunardry and couldnt afford to either ...like father like son...
heres a VERY strange point for you to consider...ealry 1800s sherrif dugald began building kilchrist castle...
today we are told he thought of himself as a chief..HMMMMM
just where in this kilchrist castle did sherrif dugald take the effort to place anything mactavish yet alone anything chiefly..
.no crests in the stonework ...
no boars heads in the gardens ...
no mactavish anything...
OH there was a pair of lions statues by the pond..(what exactly do lions have to do with mactavish ?)
come on guys...if he was chief at that time ...we would see his kilchrist castle adorned with chiefly goodies...
his son william does actually give the sherrif a title of respect in ONE letter ..he refers to sherrif as "the old laird of kilchrist"..thats all..
i do know he was broke..was in debt to his father in law for 7 years and couldnt pay a shilling off that debt...but you would see something mactavish or chiefly in that buildings stonework wouldnt you...??
something small even ...just to tell other persons that a chief lived there.??
NO ...NOTHING at all....
and since he was building that new house with the realisation it was all that was left as he had no 'dunardry" anymore and no hope of ever getting it back....
of well...this is historical proof he gave up...
in reality he didnt cos history tells us the last man to hold the titles and arms of dunardry was simon and sons
1796...lachlans family cede their rights to dunardry
1800 ...simon buys dunardy lands
1804 ...simon dies and leaves a watertight will that gives the rights to his lands of dunardry and arms ONLY to his male heirs FOREVER
1812 ...the duke of argylle declares simon mctavish and heir william mctavish as "being known as armiger of dunardry due to docs presented before me"
1812...lachlans family lawyer james ferrier declares the titles of dunardry are now in the family of simon mctavish
1818..william mctavish death notice titles him as "william mctavish of dunardry"
1818....simons daughter is described as "daughter of ther late simon mctavish of dunardry"
good night...
finally... patrick and edward dugald have , by their own actions , declared the writings of sherrif dugald to be "rubbish"
Then reinforced this when they turned their backs on everything written by sherif dugald re mctavish/campbell, and written also by lachlan and also by simon...
OUCH..then they had the balls to try and tell you all that the " new grant of mctavish corrected an ancient wrong made by lyons office"
THEY SHOULDVE BEEN MORE TRUTHFULL AND JUST SAID " WE THINK SHERRIF DUGALD WAS AN IDIOT AND WE ARE GOING TO LYONS TO CRAP ON EVERYTHING HE BELIEVED IN..."
BUT PATRICK SHOULD NOT BE AS STUPID AS TO NOW PRESENT LETTERS WRITTEN FROM SHERRIF DUGALD AND ASK YOU ALL TO BELIEVE THEM ...HE DOESNT...HE DIDNT ..HISTORY HAS PROVEN HE CRAPPED ON SHERRIF DUGALDS BELIEFS
....
more to come shortly ......more hist docs and facts then proof of the mactavish senachies twisting and disposal of those docs and facts .