Oh dear, oh dear, dear Goanetters! In my last contribution yesterday, I did undertake to make that one my last contribution on this subject but alas in light of Mervyn Lobo's somewhat feeble and disjointed attempt to rise to the challenge I presented at the commencement of our conversation and more so the pathetic offer of a tuition from Wikipedia, obliges me to respond, hopefully, for the final time. Else we run the risk of boring Goanetters unduly. Besides, however dear the subject may be to the two of us, it really does not merit this much print coverage.
Whilst Wikipedia is an interesting, quick, convenient and helpful information source and is often the first port of call when one seeks an immediate reference point, it is important to remember that the information presented therein is often highly subjective, written as it is by contributors of their own volition. I personally really do not require to refer to Wikipedia for information on the background to Zanzibar's African Revolution given my background, my early, deep and abiding interest in all matters relating to that archipelago, and my own Master's dissertation on the subject of the Revolution. Whilst it might be suggested that my dissertation also reflects a subjective point of view, I would respond that academic dissertations are required to conform to rigorous rules, monitored scrupulously by tutors. Accordingly, for every bit of information included in that work, I was required to quote a source (primary or otherwise). Whilst I was permitted to include some information from the copious notes I brought with me from Zanzibar, I had to satisfy my tutor at every turn regarding the bona fides of that information, before it was accepted. The dissertation appends a reasonably-sized list of published sources and, over the years, I have amassed a modestly significant library on all aspects relating to Zanzibar, including various parts of its history. So, thank you, but I shall defer on Wikipedia for this purpose! Mervyn's latest (and hopefully also last) contribution on this just subject singularly fails to respond to my challenge. His latest post is but a motley collection of incoherent comments and assertions that stray from the central issue under discussion namely, his initial charge that the Sultan of Zanzibar was a "puppet" of the British, a notion that I rebutted at the very start, given my understanding of what a "puppet" must represent. Having revisited his various and disparate comments in all his posts on the subject (greater fool me for doing this!), I have failed to detect any coherence to support, let alone justify, his initial assertion. What have the now defunct concept of 'Divine Right to Rule', the Scottish Referendum, the unproven charge of electoral gerrymandering in Zanzibar in the 1960s, the Zanzibar Revolution and the many other disjointed comments got to do with whether or not the Sultan was a "puppet"? With good wishes to Mervyn, I rest my case! Francis de Lima
