BEE-L Archives

Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology

BEE-L@COMMUNITY.LSOFT.COM

Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Condense Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Sender:
Discussion of Bee Biology <[log in to unmask]>
Subject:
From:
Jane Beckman <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Wed, 7 Apr 1993 15:01:09 PDT
Reply-To:
Discussion of Bee Biology <[log in to unmask]>
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (18 lines)
That's the trouble with historical revisionists like myself and my circle.
We keep finding inconvenient primary source documentation, often on the way
to researching something else.  Bees came with my research on orchard
production.  They aren't the only case, either...  (I still have several
history texts where I need to write to the author and correct some
statements and steer him to some references.)
 
I am posting my reply, since others might find this interesting.  I don't
have my reference notes readily available, at the moment, since this is
purely my hobby, ethnobotanic research, and (not having worked on this angle
over two years) they're buried in my desk midden.  If anyone is interested,
I can dig out bibliographic references.  (Currently, an article on the
history of sugar (not honey) in pre-Gold Rush California is occupying my
time and energy, I'm afraid.)
 
  --Jane Beckman   [[log in to unmask]]
  "I'm not a professional ethnobotanist; I just play one for the State."

ATOM RSS1 RSS2