BS: Old expressions explained

Subject: RE: BS: Old expressions explained
From: beardedbruce
Date: 22 Aug 05 - 01:19 PM

shakespeare, of course...

Subject: RE: BS: Old expressions explained
From: Georgiansilver
Date: 22 Aug 05 - 01:02 PM

O.K question for you...where did the expression "Hoisted by his own petard" come from?. No prizes but who knows?
Best wishes, Mike.

Subject: RE: BS: Old expressions explained
From: Georgiansilver
Date: 21 Aug 05 - 05:27 PM

Time immemmorial is a time before anyone living can remember...ie no-one has a memory of that time.
Best wishes, Mike.

Subject: RE: BS: Old expressions explained
From: GUEST, topsie
Date: 21 Aug 05 - 03:45 PM

Well, that's what it generally does mean; but I heard somewhere that a date had been set as a legal definition, and I thought someone might either know, or be able to find it.

Subject: RE: BS: Old expressions explained
From: Le Scaramouche
Date: 21 Aug 05 - 03:37 PM

Isn't it more likely to have ment simply 'since goodness knows when'?

Subject: RE: BS: Old expressions explained
From: GUEST, topsie
Date: 21 Aug 05 - 03:12 PM

I once heard that 'time immemorial' was legally defined as being a certain date, before which no-one could be expected to know exactly when some thing happened. The date was some time in the Middle Ages, but I can't remember when it was. Does some one know?

Subject: RE: BS: Old expressions explained
From: Georgiansilver
Date: 21 Aug 05 - 09:15 AM

Raedwolf. I have to agree with the guest on this one as there was a recent programme on the TV in the UK which explained the use of 'Hangers on' at hangings and how the person being hanged would sign over his worldly goods to those of his family who hung on his legs to make his death much swifter than if he/she were left to choke to death slowly.
Perhaps a little research may have been good for you to do after all.
Best wishes, Mike.

Subject: RE: BS: Old expressions explained
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 21 Aug 05 - 12:21 AM

Yes I had thought it might be "Sergei Eisenstein's Alexander Nevsky", but Briz31 showed it awhile ago. I don't remember seeing the particular fighting sequence I mentioned, but then I don't remember if I manged to stay awake for the umpteen hours either... :-)


"Lippizaners" that's the one - they may not be big, but they are nice horses. I'm not sure that a war horse had to be huge, the heavy cavalry of medieval times didn't tromp around at full speed for hours like light cavalry (as was discovered in the C13 in the middle east!!!), but were solid boned and hardy.

There was a story that some of the original horses were rescued during the end of WWII - read it in the Reader's Digest, so it must be true!

The Lippizaners are only claimed to be doing many of the original moves, not even descended from them. We had a troupe of them on the Gold Coast a while ago, but I think the owner went bankrupt some years ago. I think the horses are still doing their act around Australia somewhere.

Subject: RE: BS: Old expressions explained
From: Bunnahabhain
Date: 20 Aug 05 - 10:40 AM

Alexander Nevasky it could be. It's not silent, but it is in Russian, and Prokoveief's soundtrack for it might have been a bit out of place in the programme..

Quite alot of the acronym explanations do see to be good examples of contrived ridiculous acronym phenonoma Or crap.....

Subject: RE: BS: Old expressions explained
From: Le Scaramouche
Date: 20 Aug 05 - 10:09 AM

War horses have always been trained to kick and bite, they are just plain nasty during a fight. Marbot, for example, rode a a very bad-tempered mare called Lissete that bit the face off a Russian soldier at Eylau.

Subject: RE: BS: Old expressions explained
From: mack/misophist
Date: 19 Aug 05 - 09:43 PM

Foolstroupe:

The breed of horse sounds like Lippizaners, except that the dictionary says they're 'compact'.

The movie sounds like Sergei Eisenstein's Alexander Nevsky, if I remember the name correctly. Except that the Teutonic Knights were done in when the ice they charged across broke.

Subject: RE: BS: Old expressions explained
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 19 Aug 05 - 08:27 PM

If you want to see what a medieval Destrier was capable of, look at the white Lippen... (spelling!) Stallions. Most of their moves are claimed by their trainers to date back to natural horse movements that Destriers were trained to perform on command (and sometimes of their own free will) in combat. Biting, kicking, etc - the horse was about as destructive as a tank, and well capable of taking out lightly armed foot-soldiers before those damned 20 foot pikes became all the rage!

I have seen a clip of an old B&W movie (it was inserted in something else - I suspect it may have been originally from that Russian epic silent movie about the history of German Invasions) in which the fully kitted up horses and riders are lashing out at foot-soldiers around them - sweeping thru them like a scythe - freaky shot and one wonders just how many extras were hurt for real.

I have seen 16-18 hand high Shire Horses at the gallop - a hundred of them coming at you fully armed would definitely be brown pants stuff, and would seem like an earth quake - and if just 4 pulling a waggon at a fast trot could shake the ground under my feet that much... definitely a terror weapon!

A hand is 4 inches so 64 inches at the shoulder is BIG... the neck towers above you when they are on all fours - wouldn't like one to rear and lash its front feet at me - tin hat or not!

Subject: RE: BS: Old expressions explained
From: mack/misophist
Date: 19 Aug 05 - 06:04 PM

I have seen several references that say "by hook or by crook" comes from the old English forest laws. Pesants were not permitted to cut firewood but were allowed whatever they could pull down by hook or by crook.

Subject: RE: BS: Old expressions explained
From: Le Scaramouche
Date: 19 Aug 05 - 06:02 PM

Hanging has always been pretty standard.

Cromwell might have said by hook or crook, but certainly didn't originate it. However, this sounds like a legend.

Subject: RE: BS: Old expressions explained
From: Raedwulf
Date: 19 Aug 05 - 04:39 PM

Guest, Know all - perhaps you should rename yourself "Know nothing" Hangers on? What rubbish! Hanging was hardly a standard method of execution in the 16th & 17th centuries, no matter how much lynching might be beloved of spaghetti western directors. It would certainly not have engendered the modern phrase you attempt to explain.

Without bothering to research at all, I would suggest, purely from my knowledge of history, that "hanging-on" is more likely to derive from the practice of a servant "hanging on" to his master's stirrup (even the horses tail in some tales!) as an aid to keeping up with him.

Subject: RE: BS: Old expressions explained
From: The Curator
Date: 19 Aug 05 - 04:37 PM

I have often heard it said that when Oliver Cromwell was at his work in Ireland he ran into a bit of opposition and had to to rethink his sea landings on the southern bays of Ireland. To this he said he will reach shore BY HOOK OR BY CROOK which he did, two bays on the southern shoreline. Anyone else ever hear that one ?

Subject: RE: BS: Old expressions explained
From: Raedwulf
Date: 19 Aug 05 - 04:28 PM

Speaking as an active re-enactor, may I clear up the armour nonsense?

Full harness of around the 15thC weighs something around/over 100 lbs. A mate of mine regularly represents himself as Edward IV (including at Tewkesbury, one of the biggest UK re-enactments). I can't provide you with independent verification, but he has told me that his harness is made as closely as possible to match Eddie IV's armour (can't remember what the 'model' is...) & weighs around 140 lb. This is heavier than most re-enactors wear (98-112lb is a typical figure), but Simon has also spoken slightly disparagingly of 'lightweights' wearing slightly cut down (this normally means not bothering with some of the chain mail that is still part of harness at this period) kit!

Full harness is still very mobile. It is well articulated, the weight well distributed, & most importantly, the knight was a highly trained martial artist used to wearing the bloody stuff! The notion that you needed a crane to get on horseback is yet another Victorian distortion. There was a notorious attempt on the part of a Victorian blue blood (dare I say "effete"?) to stage a medieval tourney. Neither he nor his friends had any training, the weather mostly washed it out, & he (Viscount Edington, Edginton? Something like that...) just about bankrupted himself, silly bleeder.

Although Robin is half right. Armour strictly-for-tourney was thicker & less flexible than that for regular warfare (in particular, helms for tourney developed a very distinctive shape (thicker & shaped to deflect at the front), & were heavy!). Not to the extent of needing a crane if you were properly trained, though! In any case, tourneys were usually illegal...

There is a lengthy passage from a medieval treatise that includes the quote above about being able to vault onto horseback without using the stirrup (personally I suspect they still used the saddle for leverage!). It is accurate. Unfortunately, I can neither remember the title of the treatise, nor the full quote, but the "vault" is more or less the last in a lenghty list of accomplishments that, yes, includes acrobatics, handstands & such like. This is not at all unreasonable if you realise that these guys trained with the same dedication as any full time soldier, martial artist, or Shao-Lin monk!

HuwG - Whilst I wouldn't quibble with your naval opinions (generally, I'd agree) your medieval musings smack more of guesswork than research. Horse armour was "barding", not a tabard, which is a sleeveless, sideless, cloth over-vestment typically worn by heralds! You don't seem to be able to decide just what you think medieval armour weighs. Etcetera. And your explanation of "high horse" I'm highly dubious of too! I very much doubt it dates back to medieval times. It might, again, represent a Victorian misunderstanding of earlier history.

Palfrey can be literally translated as "light horse", but the corollary is not "high horse". Knight's mounts were not "carthorses", which generally don't gallop very well, not being bred for that sort of activity. Destrier (probably the premier re-enactors of jousting in the UK, whose MC/spielman is a good mate of mine) use more or less normal horses (insofar as my inexpert eye is a judge of horseflesh - Shires & Clydesdales they are not!) & still wear full harness.

Admittedly, modern horses are certainly larger than their medieval predecessors. I have heard it reckoned that the medieval warhorse was probably about the size of a polo pony, or a little larger. But certainly medieval warhorses were not 'carthorses'. Destrier as a word, according to the OED, stems from Latin dextra "right hand", which refers to the fact that the squires would lead the horse with their right hand. Again nothing about 'high'. Many other professions use 'horses' of some description that are not necessarily equine (carpenters, frex). Virtually any bench that you sit astride whilst working has been termed a horse, & your explanation very much smacks (like all the acronymic origins) of a modern back-formation. And since horsehair was often used as a cushioning material, I would be inclined to wonder whether "on your high horse" (which in my experience tends to have a judgemental, rather than confrontational, context) has a legal origin.

Moreover, whilst the notion of knights as being wealthy & upper class is very de rigeur & romatic, the reality is that most of them were about what the modern view of a country esquire is. Working middle class on the make, if you see what I mean. How many could afford a second riding horse, after having equipped themselves & their retinue appropriately, is open to debate. Most of the time armour would not be worn. The 'honourable' preliminaries would allow more than ample time for a knight to get armoured, & if there was not felt to be any imminent threat they would not have been wearing full harness (it takes 5-10 minutes to don, with a competent squire - like modern warfare, medieval war was 98% standing around bored, punctuated by occasional 'brown' moments of frantic activity!). No great impediment, then, to riding your warhorse at the walking pace that allows the archers, men-at-arms, & baggage train to keep up... I'm less than convinced, sorry.

Subject: RE: BS: Old expressions explained
From: Torctgyd
Date: 19 Aug 05 - 05:47 AM

As a kid in nw London we used to play the game of knocking on a front door or ringing the bell and then running away (oh what fun we had!). We called it Knock Down Ginger. This seems to have been a fairly local expression; any ideas where it came from?

Subject: RE: BS: Old expressions explained
From: Bunnahabhain
Date: 19 Aug 05 - 05:25 AM

"Shit fire and save matches"

Corruption of saftey matches????

Subject: RE: BS: Old expressions explained
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 18 Aug 05 - 06:40 PM

A Cacadragon?

Subject: RE: BS: Old expressions explained
From: Le Scaramouche
Date: 18 Aug 05 - 06:00 PM

Whaaaat?

Subject: RE: BS: Old expressions explained
From: Donuel
Date: 18 Aug 05 - 05:20 PM

Blue bloods : Is a verified medical condition that results from inbreeding. It was true of very few Europeon royals but predominant for the highest class (Brahmans) in India going back several hundred years ago. You will note that not just ancient Indian artists painted Brahmans blue.
The condition was associated with hemophelia bruises but that is not always the case.
There were some cases known among the very poor in Appalachia but it is not politically correct to stereotypically inflict this fact upon West Virginians today.

.................


"Shit fire and save matches"

I suppose if one did shit fire they could conceivably save on matches or any other such lighter device.

Subject: RE: BS: Old expressions explained
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 18 Aug 05 - 11:21 AM

In Adelaide, they sell a 'Meat Pie Floater' - which is a meat pie served in a large bowl of pea soup.

On Naval Gins (sorry Guns!!!!) I remember a story in a collection of volumes (The Golden Pathway) produced in the 1920's or thereabouts which was about a gun that broke loose and the resultant efforts to tame it like a wild beast.

Subject: RE: BS: Old expressions explained
From: Guy Wolff
Date: 17 Aug 05 - 11:31 PM

certain expressions need no explanation.
P G Woodhouse (sp?) had a few I have always loved.
A " Vapid Waistrill " comes to mind

as dose making a social blunder or a " Floater " . Gosh I wonder what that comes from ??

More soon , Guy

Subject: RE: BS: Old expressions explained
From: GUEST,Shanghaiceltic
Date: 17 Aug 05 - 11:12 PM

HuwG you are correct, I used the term RUL as that was a term I was used to when I was in the RN.

Having shot and more importantly even small quanitities of powder on the gundecks was the reason why most sailors were only allowed to chew tobacco.

Subject: RE: BS: Old expressions explained
From: HuwG
Date: 17 Aug 05 - 10:16 PM

Amos, Shanghaiceltic et al.

I believe that warships of Nelson's day and thereabouts, held at least some of the shot for their cannon in "garlands". These were flat wooden racks recessed into the decks along the centreline of the ship. When not in action or at exercise, wooden lids covered the garlands. The garlands plus lids stood only a few inches proud of the decks themselves, allowing sailors to stand or walk on them, sling hammocks over them etc.

At a guess, ten or perhaps twelve rounds per gun could be carried in the garlands. Don't forget that shot is quite heavy. When clearing for action in a hurry, you would not want sailors staggering up the ladders each carrying a twenty-four or thirty-two pound lump of metal. No doubt more shot would be carried in the holds, but it is reasonable to suppose that after twelve broadsides, the battle would be won or lost.

I believe the concept of "ready-use" lockers came later in Queen Victoria's time, with brass cartridges and QF ("quick-firing") guns which could get through ammunition faster than the hoists could fetch it from the magazines. The ready-use locker could allow the guns to indulge in a minute's rapid fire in case of emergency.

Subject: RE: BS: Old expressions explained
From: Shanghaiceltic
Date: 17 Aug 05 - 07:59 PM

Hi Amos, see my reference to ready use lockers where small amounts of powder would be kept, small quantities of round shot would also be kept available. I agree the gunners would try and keep their iron shot in good condition and free of rust which has a blistering effect on cast iron.

Subject: RE: BS: Old expressions explained
From: Amos
Date: 17 Aug 05 - 07:41 PM

Snopes also disputes the cannonball storage idea as inaccurate:

"Somebody's fanciful imagination is at work cooking up spurious etymologies again. In short, this origin for the phrase "cold enough to freeze the balls off a brass monkey" is nonsense because:

Not even the venerable Oxford English Dictionary, records a usage of "brass monkey" like the one presented here.

When references to "brass monkeys" started appearing in print in the mid-19th century, they did not always mention balls or cold temperatures. It was sometimes cold enough to freeze the ears, tail, nose, or whiskers off a brass monkey. Likewise, it was sometimes hot enough to "scald the throat" or "singe the hair" of a brass monkey. These usages are inconsistent with the putative origins offered here.

Warships didn't store cannonballs (or "round shot") on deck around the clock, day after day, on the slight chance that they might go into battle. Space was a precious commodity on sailing ships, and decks were kept as clear as possible in order to allow room for hundreds of men to perform all the tasks necessary for ordinary ship's functions. (Stacking round shot on deck would also create the danger of their breaking free and rolling around loose on deck whenever the ship encountered rough seas.) Cannonballs were stored elsewhere and only brought out when the decks had been cleared for action.

Particularly diligent gunners (not "masters," who were in charge of navigation, sailing and pilotage, not ordnance) would have their crews chip away at imperfections on the surface of cannonballs to make them as smooth as possible, in the hopes that this would cause them fly truer. They did not leave shot on deck, exposed to the elements, where it would rust.

Nobody really knows where the phrase "cold enough to freeze the balls off a brass monkey" came from, but the explanation offered here certainly isn't the answer.

Last updated:   9 January 2001"

Subject: RE: BS: Old expressions explained
From: lady penelope
Date: 17 Aug 05 - 06:06 PM

Woad - the blue dye comes from the leaves of the plant and not the seed (crushed seed apparently gives you a pale pink dye). The initial infusion from the leaves has to have urine added to it to make a) actually fix as blue and b) fix in the cloth that's being dyed. It takes about 1 - 2 weeks to dye a piece of cloth with woad (depending on how deep a colour you want).

Some how I don't see this as a good material for painting yerself with. There may be the possibility that it was used for tattooing depending on the fixatives that they may have used. Once woad has fixed, it's apparently quite a stable colour. But the quantity needed to make the dye (and the fact that you can only use the plant at certain times during it's two year growing cycle) would have made it reasonably precious.

TTFN Lady P.

Subject: RE: BS: Old expressions explained
From: HuwG
Date: 17 Aug 05 - 03:39 PM

OK folks, I did indeed exaggerate a bit about the weight of armour carried by mediaeval knights. A really full set weighed about forty-five or fifty pounds, well-distributed. (They could become hot and wearisome after a while, but for short periods at least, a fit knight could run, get up from falls or even do acrobatics.)

The horse tabard could be an unwieldy piece of kit. I don't have any weights to hand, but another fifty pounds seems about likely, if only the front of the horse was protected, or a hundred for all-round protection.

However, war-horses did have certain desirable attributes. They were usually stallions, with their own testosterone-fuelled aggressive reaction to noise and stress. They did indeed stand high, allowing the rider an extra inch or two of reach. And they were valuable, and were preserved for the moment of battle.

Subject: RE: BS: Old expressions explained
From: Bunnahabhain
Date: 17 Aug 05 - 02:52 PM

The myths about medievil armour just refuse to die. If only everyone had to join the Sealed Knot, or SCA or such like for a while....


The average combat load ( weight of kit etc) of fighting soldiers has remained fairly constant since at least the roman legions, if not the Greeks and before.
People can only carry so much weigh for a long period and remain combat fit, and it doesn't make much difference if you were marching with Ceaser, Wellington or todays Commanders.

Subject: RE: BS: Old expressions explained
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 17 Aug 05 - 07:46 AM

"it grew out of in-group reference to the names of government boards and bureaus."

More likely from the stencil marks on sides of cases.

~~~~~~~~

A medieval knight in full fighting armour, afoften ter his years of training as a squire from a young lad, could leap onto his saddle from the ground without using the stirrups. Those huge suits of thick plate armour from a much later period, ARE as heavy as all shit, and were used for only tournament jousting, and the rider was usually lifted into the saddle by means of an A-frame style of crane.

Subject: RE: BS: Old expressions explained
From: mack/misophist
Date: 17 Aug 05 - 01:32 AM

As I understand it, the 3 gold balls that traditionally hang over a pawnbroker's door were taken from the di Medici coat of arms.

Subject: RE: BS: Old expressions explained
From: rich-joy
Date: 17 Aug 05 - 12:22 AM

still want to know about "you're pulling my leg" origins!

but I found this to add to that old chestnut, The Brass Monkey Debate :

" HMS Victory and Greenwich used to have an educational piece as part of the tour, according to them a 'Brass Monkey' was a small brass cannon from the time of transition from bronze to iron, usually swivel mounted that used stone ball or cylinder shot, both of inconsistent size and shape. 'Freezing a brass monkey' either refered to the cannon shrinking enough that *some* shot wouldn't fit so slowing the reload, or 'Freezing the tail off a brass monkey' was the tail being the handle at the end of the gun used for aiming which reportedly broke when levering a piece around on the pivot.

Another story is apparently pawn brokers where originally known as brass monkeys and the three brass balls hung outside the shop has something to do with the idea ..."

From: "charles" (via cache on Google : USENET ARCHIVE)
Newsgroups: rec.crafts.metalworking
Subject: Re: How do they make worry balls?



cheers! R-J

Subject: RE: BS: Old expressions explained
From: Le Scaramouche
Date: 16 Aug 05 - 11:29 PM

HuwG, where did you get that from?
The armour worn in battle by knights actualy weighed less than a modern infantryman's kit and the weight was distributed evenly across his body. Surprisingly agile. Nobody would have been stupid enough to wear something like you describe had their life depended on it.

Subject: RE: BS: Old expressions explained
From: catspaw49
Date: 16 Aug 05 - 10:59 PM

I've always enjoyed these threads as you can tell from the post that was quoted above. It's great to feel stupid after feeling so absolutely sure you have some secret answer that makes you look brilliant......kinda' humbling.

Snopes is an excellent site for debunking the bullshit and I love reading there. So........before it comes up here and I am already surprised it hasn't...........CLICK HERE for the Snopes page dealing with the word fuck....which is NOT an acronym.

Spaw

Subject: RE: BS: Old expressions explained
From: HuwG
Date: 16 Aug 05 - 10:36 PM

Also from mediaeval times: "To get on one's high horse", which nowadays means to react indignantly, or to take an agressive stance in argument.

In battle, something the size of a carthorse was required to carry a knight encased in armour (and sometimes armour for the horse also) at anything like a gallop. This was the destrier, or "high horse".

To save its strength, the destrier wasn't usually mounted until the moment of battle arrived. It was usually led by the squire or varlet, while the knight pottered along on something hardier and more willing, the ambling palfrey.

When the knight "got on his high horse", combat was imminent.

Subject: RE: BS: Old expressions explained
From: Le Scaramouche
Date: 16 Aug 05 - 09:41 PM

Shanghaiceltic, I believe you are right about the crossbow. There was quite a debate at the time and I believe the Genoans got into trouble over it once or twice.

Subject: RE: BS: Old expressions explained
From: Uncle_DaveO
Date: 16 Aug 05 - 08:50 PM

Our friend GUEST Know All is just full of urban legends and folk etymologies, isn't (s)he?

Incidentally, any time you see an explanation of a word which makes it an acronym from some interesting story--take it with a grain of salt. No, better, take it with a POUND of salt!

The practice of referring to things by acronyms is only a development of the last ninety or so years, since about World War I, when I assume it grew out of in-group reference to the names of government boards and bureaus.

Dave Oesterreich

Subject: RE: BS: Old expressions explained
From: Shanghaiceltic
Date: 16 Aug 05 - 08:26 PM

It was not 'Pull a leg' that was used on Georgian period ships but 'Show a leg' If the leg was hairy then the possibility was strong that it belonged to a sailor.

Cannon shot was never piled for reasons already given. The brass plates were flat and had circular recesses to hold the iron shot. Brass was used because brass striking iron could not make a spark.

Even in todays modern navy only brass tools are allowed in magazine areas.

Another expression not often used today is 'To have another shot left in the locker'

Refers to the use of what was called ready use lockers placed near guns to hold a small amount of powder. There was just enough in the RUL's to bring a ship to action and fire whilst the powder monkeys started their run to the magazines which were well below the water line of the ship.

'Tightwad' today has the connotation (or did have) of being tight fisted. Again it comes from the use of extra wadding used to hold the ball in place in a muzzle loading gun. Tighter wadding meant a bit less powder could be used as the seal between the powder charge and the ball in front was better and a better explosive force could be developed.

A much older expression 'to pick a quarell' goes back to the days of the crossbow. The quarrell or quareau was an armour peircing bolt used against mounted knights.

The Pope I believe at one time tried to excommunicate Richard The Lionheart because his armies used crossbows which the Pope stated were unchristian. The Lionheart was not excommunicated as he pointed out it was being used against non-christians. I am not sure of the veracity of that story. Maybe someone will know more.

Subject: RE: BS: Old expressions explained
From: mack/misophist
Date: 16 Aug 05 - 03:48 PM

On checking, it seems that the phrase "You're pulling my leg" only goes back to the 1800's. It's an English reference to tripping some one as a joke.

Subject: RE: BS: Old expressions explained
From: mack/misophist
Date: 16 Aug 05 - 03:39 PM

Note to Guest_KnowItAll: As I heard it, that situation is the source of the phrase 'Pulling my leg'. Never checked for authenticity, though.

Subject: RE: BS: Old expressions explained
From: Le Scaramouche
Date: 16 Aug 05 - 01:15 PM

Sangazure was the surname of the spoilt brat Alexis' bride in G&S's the Sorcerer.

Subject: RE: BS: Old expressions explained
From: Amos
Date: 16 Aug 05 - 01:15 PM

A few modern expressions which need no explanation, from www.despair.com:

Cluelessness
There are no stupid questions, but there are a LOT of inquisitive idiots.

Delusions

There is no greater joy than soaring high on the wings of your dreams, except maybe the joy of watching a dreamer who has nowhere to land but in the ocean of reality.

Dreams

Dreams are like rainbows. Only idiots chase them.

No one can make you feel inferior without your consent, but you'd be a fool to withhold that from your superior.

Overconfidence

Before you attempt to beat the odds, be sure you could survive the odds beating you.

Power

Power corrupts. Absolute power corrupts absolutely. But it rocks absolutely, too.

Pretension

The downside of being better than everyone else is that people tend to assume you're pretentious.

These guys are a crack-up!


A

Subject: RE: BS: Old expressions explained
From: MMario
Date: 16 Aug 05 - 01:07 PM

don't know the origins - but shit does NOT come from "store high in transit" - another urban legend.

Subject: RE: BS: Old expressions explained
From: Amos
Date: 16 Aug 05 - 01:00 PM

Wickipedia Encyclopedia reports:

"The first finds of woad seeds date to the Neolithic and have been found in the French cave of l'Audoste, Bouches du Rhone (France). In the Iron Age settlement of the Heuneburg, Germany, impressions of the seeds have been found on pottery. The Hallstatt burials of Hochdorf and Hohmichele contained textiles dyed with woad. Julius Caesar tells us (de Bello Gallico) that the Britanni used to dye their bodies with woad (vitrum), which made them look terrible in battle. The Picts got their name (Latin Picti which means painted folk or possibly tattooed folk) from their practice of going into battle naked except for decorations made with woad war paint. Yet others feel that woad was used as an astringent. It produces quite a bit of scar tissue, but heals very quickly, and no blue is left behind. It may have been used specifically for closing battle wounds."


It was the Picts, then; and if you can't believe Julius Caesar, man, who CAN you believe?? :D

But I retract my assertions about woad having anything to do with "blue blood". It appears it was a Spanish brag relating to the paleness of skin and blueness of vein in pure-bred aristos:

"A translation of the Spanish sangre azul attributed to some of the oldest and proudest families of Castile, who claimed never to have been contaminated by Moorish, Jewish, or other foreign admixture; the expression probably originated in the blueness of the veins of people of fair complexion as compared with those of dark skin; also, a person with blue blood; an aristocrat."

(From "Phrase", a UK etymology website).

Sorry. But I like my woad version better even if it is fecal! LOL

A

Subject: RE: BS: Old expressions explained
From: Bunnahabhain
Date: 16 Aug 05 - 12:59 PM

Letting the cat out of the bag:

I always understood that this one came from the custom of selling a piglets in a bag at a fair. An unscrupulous seller might put a cat in the bag instead of a piglet, and so when you inspected your purchase, you may discover this secret, by letting the cat out of the bag.

Subject: RE: BS: Old expressions explained
From: Le Scaramouche
Date: 16 Aug 05 - 12:51 PM

Yes, the last thing you needed were cannonballs rolling about on deck, especially at night time.

Subject: RE: BS: Old expressions explained
From: curmudgeon
Date: 16 Aug 05 - 12:49 PM

Evidently, some of you who chose to ignore Kendall's comment on brass monkeys, also failed to go to the link posted by Bev and Jerry.

Fact is, nothing was ever stacked aboard a ship, except cargo in the holds. Everything on deck was tightly secured to prevent it being tossed about in high seas, especially things that rolled, like cannonballs - Tom

Subject: RE: BS: Old expressions explained
From: Le Scaramouche
Date: 16 Aug 05 - 12:46 PM

No, we are disupting the connection with blue blood.