Go on...show us your Choora!!

ariel · 8th June 2015, 03:18 AM

Gentlemen,
We are digressing .
The entire label with 1854 was written with the same ink and nobody ever mentioned different handwritings. I do not know where did Mahratt get this info, as it was not something told to me by the examiners and I never mentioned it to you.

We are not discussing the etymology of the word Choora and its applicability to the daggers in question.

Similarly, I am not entering the fray arguing about differences and similarities of Karud and Choora ( whatever they represent).

The salient point of Dr. Baker's expert opinion was that the labels were adjoined to the scabbards sometime in the mid 19th century and started to age together with wood and leather from there on. That's it. It does not depend on the text analysis of the labels or on their content. We are talking pure papyrology or whatever we want to call it.

Can we limit our discussion to the facts we learned from the world-reknown expert in the field and ignore any extraneous issues together with our opinions, suppositions and biases?

This will be a true academic approach.

We can also recall that a similar admonition is given by any judge to any jury:-)

8th June 2015, 03:18 AM	#11
ariel Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Ann Arbor, MI Posts: 5,503	Gentlemen, We are digressing . The entire label with 1854 was written with the same ink and nobody ever mentioned different handwritings. I do not know where did Mahratt get this info, as it was not something told to me by the examiners and I never mentioned it to you. We are not discussing the etymology of the word Choora and its applicability to the daggers in question. Similarly, I am not entering the fray arguing about differences and similarities of Karud and Choora ( whatever they represent). The salient point of Dr. Baker's expert opinion was that the labels were adjoined to the scabbards sometime in the mid 19th century and started to age together with wood and leather from there on. That's it. It does not depend on the text analysis of the labels or on their content. We are talking pure papyrology or whatever we want to call it. Can we limit our discussion to the facts we learned from the world-reknown expert in the field and ignore any extraneous issues together with our opinions, suppositions and biases? This will be a true academic approach. We can also recall that a similar admonition is given by any judge to any jury:-) Last edited by ariel; 8th June 2015 at 04:48 AM.