# The trouble with 'historical' evidence, Liverpool UK.



## Timeshifter (Apr 26, 2021)

Please move KD if in wrong section.

As part of my investigation n the the History of the city of Liverpool, UK, I came across this painting by James Taylor Eglington.



Source​The trouble is, Eglington was only 5 years old when the depiction within this image is supposedly happening.

Further research leads me to discover this painting was made in 1862, so my next question would be what was his reference? How did he know exactly how this scene appeared in 19818?

Further investigation leads me to realise, many if not all of Eglingtons paintings are based on times past..

Here are just a few


Source

I wonder how accurate his 1839 painting of The Entry into London of Richard II and Bolingbroke, 1399 is?

Basically, we have depictions in paintings of previous times drawn through what sources? Other paintings, word of mouth? Stories, or just day dreams?

Either way, the general populous and academia accept these paintings as being factual, and evidence of reality, and herein lies our problem in uncovering the real truths.

In the centre of the top painting, just 36 years later this building appears, followed by many more similar surrounding it

Opened in 1854 , St George's Hall. I am currently putting together an idea on this building, more to follow when I get time.





So in just 34 years, we went from this to this.... 

​A side note, I can find zero evidence of anyone with the name of James Taylor Eglington having ever existed, no notes, no images of him, zip.

Thoughts?





> Note: This OP was recovered from the Sh.org archive.





> Note: Archived Sh.org replies to this OP are included in this thread.


----------



## feralimal (Apr 26, 2021)

> Note: This post was recovered from the Sh.org archive.Username: FeralimalDate: 2019-10-24 09:50:57Reaction Score: 1


I love these sorts of issues.  These sorts of questions, and this site in general, are an opportunity to put practical epistemology into practise.  (Epistemology is the philosophy concerned with the nature of knowledge, ie how we know things.)  Perhaps this sounds dull compared to pictures, data, etc, but I think it's where it's really at.  How do we contextualize all this info?

Ultimately, these are things that break down to trust.  Do you trust or distrust the objective world and the narratives provided.  Are you a normie or seeking?  Do you believe the msm or stolen history et al?

Do you trust the subjective world?  Are you certain that you base your actions on your experiences?   Or do you think the world shifts around you?  (Perhaps you are Mandela affected?)

My own stance is that there is an objective world - truth and the reality of what has happened.  But we cannot know it 100%.  We can try to align ourselves to it as best we can from our personal positions.  This is to say we shouldn't assume anything that we have not personally verified, and even then we may have been tricked.  So, no we cannot know the truth, but we can try to get 99.999% of the way there.

In this particular instance, we can once again affirm that the expression of the objective reality we are given is erroneous.  That is not a 5year old town.  And as timeshifter says, we can extrapolate that other paintings by eglington are also day dreams.  Another likely untrustworthy source then for us, if we are trying to get closer to truth.


----------



## KD Archive (Apr 26, 2021)

> Note: This post was recovered from the Sh.org archive.Username: KorbenDallasDate: 2019-10-24 10:07:40Reaction Score: 1


Looks like this Eglington guy was _mentioned_ here.

Wondering if he had anything to do with the Eglington Tournament.

I would like to know his biography though. For such a famous artist, it sure is hard find any useful info.


----------



## Timeshifter (Apr 26, 2021)

> Note: This post was recovered from the Sh.org archive.Username: TimeshifterDate: 2019-10-24 11:05:23Reaction Score: 0




KorbenDallas said:


> Looks like this Eglington guy was _mentioned_ here.
> 
> Wondering if he had anything to do with the Eglington Tournament.
> 
> I would like to know his biography though. For such a famous artist, it sure is hard find any useful info.


Yep, my thoughts exactly, surely not another pseudo character....


----------



## Archive (Apr 26, 2021)

> Note: This post was recovered from the Sh.org archive.Username: Martin77Date: 2019-10-24 13:32:30Reaction Score: 0


I think it's an ordinary story of all these buildings. All were "built" just before photography was wide spread - so you won't find photos of construction.


----------



## Archive (Apr 26, 2021)

> Note: This post was recovered from the Sh.org archive.Username: BalibrewDate: 2019-10-24 15:07:48Reaction Score: 0




KorbenDallas said:


> Looks like this Eglington guy was _mentioned_ here.
> 
> Wondering if he had anything to do with the Eglington Tournament.
> 
> I would like to know his biography though. For such a famous artist, it sure is hard find any useful info.


There is an Eglington st in Glasgow, if thats sny help.


----------



## anotherlayer (Apr 26, 2021)

> Note: This post was recovered from the Sh.org archive.Username: anotherlayerDate: 2019-10-24 16:06:28Reaction Score: 0


And an Eglington in Toronto:

_There are two sources for the naming of Eglinton Avenue. Henry Scadding in an early history of the city wrote that it originated from Eglinton Castle in Scotland, itself named for the Earls of Eglinton. Several early settlers, impressed by the Eglinton Tournament of 1839 hosted by the 13th Earl, named the hamlet developing in the area as the Village of Eglinton after the Earl. More likely is the humbler story that it was named by the tavern keeper John Montgomery who settled in the area in 1830 and named the village after the Earl of Eglinton of the Montgomerie family, to whom he believed he had a family connection.__[1]_


----------



## wild heretic (Apr 26, 2021)

> Note: This post was recovered from the Sh.org archive.Username: wild hereticDate: 2019-10-24 22:38:51Reaction Score: 1


Yet another greek roman type building where it shouldnt be. They all seem to be massive too. Very difficult to pin point an era. Back when people were a lot bigger. Late roman period maybe which is 13 to 1500s Perhaps? The st petersburg one suggests pre 1700 anyway. Maybe 15 to 1700 is more realistic. Hard to tell.


----------



## JWW427 (Apr 26, 2021)

> Note: This post was recovered from the Sh.org archive.Username: JWW427Date: 2019-10-27 14:26:29Reaction Score: 1


Don't forget it had an organ!
Organs and 19th century buildings go together like Capt. Nemo and the Nautilus.


----------

