Quote:
|
Originally Posted by sirupate
I have often wondered why some people have always thought they know more than renowned experts, especially in this case
|
I think you wonder this more often than most because the cornerstone of many of your arguments is an appeal to authority. Other posters rightly question or reject such logical fallacies and you are left wondering: ‘Why won’t these people just believe me? I spoke to a very important man, a man who knows a great deal about a great many things. Do these people really think they know more than this expert?’
You must remind yourself, JP Cross and Bhudiman Gurung have not come to this forum and posted a “correction” for the benefit of collectors (a number of whom are fluent in Nepali themselves). You, Sirupate, have posted this correction. To contextualise this for readers who are unfamiliar, I’d like to quote Berkley (Adimn and Mod extraordinaire) rather than try to say the same thing less eloquently:
“
For some time our friend Sirupate has been in the habit of making statements attributed to living individuals who have internet access. When he relates that he made an inquiry of these individuals regarding some topic, and they made reply, we are left in a scholarly quandary. When someone attributes a statement of fact to a published work, anyone can check the work to see if they are accurately quoting what the author said. When someone attributes a statement of fact to an unpublished private communication, no such verification is possible… To quote the late Ronald Reagan: "Trust, but verify".”
It is fair to say that this new hypothesis warrants close scrutiny. Even if the interpretation came to us direct from JP Cross himself it would still be open to scrutiny. Yes it would have a great deal more credibility, but experts make errors too. If the proclamations of “experts” were never challenged we would still believe that the earth is flat and located at the centre of the universe. Evidence is king.
The claim has now been clarified from “
an old local Nepali dialect” to Newari script which may well have been “
degraded”. Well now, that’s something we can all look into at our leisure.
At first glance the Newari Dh(a) symbols look even less like the mark on these kukri than the Devanagari version. So problem number one with this new hypothesis is that there is currently no obvious similarity between the symbol on these kukri and the word “Dhu”. The onus is on you to provide an image of the script for “Dhu” that you believe matches with the mark on these kukri.
Problem number two is that it the mark is on issued and inspected Nepalese Army kukri. Would such kukri simultaneously bear the stamp of Chandra Shamsher Jung Bahadur Rana and a Newari stamp? Can anyone suggest why the Rana’s suppression of Newari writing might not apply to the weapons issued to their own soldiers?
Just to be clear, I am open to any and all interpretations; provided they are supported with something more than “So and So said it was so”