I have been taking a beating on the "history channel" today, so we will respond here, in case someone want's to have there right as an American citizen to respond:
Renee,
How in the world do you see two against and one for the circus? I was pleased as it showed an unbias but a definite need for regulation/standard.
Wade Burck
*************************************************************************************
Anonymous said...
I think that Arstingstall may have been involved in the animal import trade in the interim, or in Europe, possibly doing training.
Dick Flint said..."I think..may have been" but based on what evidence? Maybe he worked at an early zoo (several important elephant people made that transition). Frankly, it's not fair to speculate anonymously AND without citing any suggestive evidence. Your "thinking" then becomes the next person's fact and as a historian I spend too much time unraveling old speculation. Better to merely illustrate what some others did at the time, as with those that went to zoos such as Sol Stephen, and suggest other possibilities in that way.
By the way, the Howes name was no longer in the title for 1876-78 and it was just the Great London. Of course, it becomes Cooper & Bailey so in essence he did not change shows. He was a Bailey man pretty much all of his career.
Dick Flint
Baltimore
"Your "thinking" then becomes the next person's fact and as a historian I spend too much time unraveling old speculation". That's jackpots, an important and only validating facet of circus history. LOL
Wade Burck
No comments:
Post a Comment