Feeling A Bit Beeton

Life lately has been unusual. Odd. Off, if you will. There have been many challenges, but I still want to take care of my loyal readers. Those trials and tribulations have caused me not to have a decent idea for this month's column, but I did come up with something, and it's somewhat timely. It has to do with a piece I wrote 10 years ago for my local Sherlockian club, and it will do just fine here. Let's see what my brain came up with at age 43, shall we?

As most of us know, A Study in Scarlet (STUD) was first released to the world on November 21, 1887. That fact made its usual rounds on Facebook and other media platforms, and Sherlockians, Holmesians, Watsonians, Doyleans, Hudsonians (did I just create a new thing?), and all other of our illustrious ilk rejoiced in the event. Along with that momentous occasion we all thought about a time when a select few of us have held a copy of the original publication in our hands. Beeton's Christmas Annual holds the distinction of being the first magazine to offer Our Heroes to the world, and some of us have seen one in person. Quite exciting. So, I dug out this column. I reference a Beeton book in my collection, so I'll place a photo of it here so you'll know which of the many listed below I'm referring to.

So, on to the original column. I am presenting here unchanged (errors and all) from when it was written and published in September 2014. 

2 Beeton’s, Or Not 2 Beeton’s? In September there is going to be a major gathering of Sherlockians/Holmesians from all over the world. Gillette to Brett IV promises to be one heck of event. One of the things we enjoyed at the last one was looking at some very rare publications at the Lilly Library. Among them was a Beeton’s Christmas Annual. You know, the magazine that contained a little story called A Study in Scarlet. That got me to thinking about the name Beeton’s. I have a Beeton’s book on one of my bookshelves, and I know that their name appeared on other things. I began to wonder how many, so I looked it up. Let me start by saying that these folks put their moniker on a ton of stuff. I compiled a list of what I could find. These are in no specific order. Beeton’s Book of Poultry and Domestic Animals; Bible Dictionary; Historical Romances, Daring Deeds, and Animal Stories; British Biography; Fact, Fiction, History, and Adventure; Book of Jokes and Jests; Famous Voyages, Brigand Adventures, Tales of the Battlefield, Life and Nature; Modern European Celebrities – A Biography; Sixpenny Book of Songs; Guide to the Stock Exchange and Money; Book of Burlesque; Ready Reckoner – A Business and Family Arithmetic; Classical Dictionary; Dictionary of Natural History; Gardening Book; Book of Anecdote, Wit, and Humour; Date-book: A British Chronology; Tales of Perils and Adventures by Sea and Land; Dictionary of Universal Biography; Counting House Book; Dictionary of Commerce; Book of Universal Information; Public Speaker; Handy Book of Games; Domestic Recipe Book Also: Family Etiquette (by S.O. Beeton); The Queen – The Ladies Newspaper (a weekly magazine for women); Mrs. Beeton’s Book of Household Management (this is the one I have); Mrs. Beeton’s Dictionary of Everyday Cookery This is not a complete list, just the ones I could find in a single evening of searching. Some of the above titles are included in a nine-book series called Beeton’s National Reference Books. I have also found a listing of books about letter writing that feature the Beeton name. Seems that if there was a topic, they had a book about it. I should also point out that every title was published by the famous house of Ward, Lock, & Co. Now, one might imagine that there may not have been actual Beetons whose name was applied to these tomes, but there was. Isabella Mary Mayson Beeton was married to Samuel Orchart (S.O.) Beeton, and they really did live in England. Samuel was already a publisher when they married, and in time his wife began to write things for his books. In 1859 her pieces started to be published, and in 1861 they were compiled together for the first time – on Christmas Day, to be exact. Isabella died in 1865 at age 28, exactly one week after the birth of their fourth child. Samuel died in 1877 at age 46. Of their four sons, one died in less than a year, and another died of scarlet fever at just two. Of their remaining two boys, one went on to have a successful career in the Army, then followed in his father’s footsteps becoming a publisher and then a journalist. The other went on to be a surveyor of some note in Newfoundland, and became president of a company called the Anglo Newfoundland Development Company, a paper mill business. The mill was able to supply paper during The Great War for the Daily Mail newspaper, which held the world record for daily circulation. So now, when you hear the name Beeton’s, you’ll have a little bit more info about them.

It's fun for me to go back and re-read some of the things that have came from my proverbial pen. I revel in the fact that my writing style hasn't changed much, and that people like you still enjoy reading it. (Sometimes I get really amazing compliments on it, often followed with questions about why I don't do it professionally. I love those!) (We'll talk more about those things another time.)

Well, there you go. I'm sorry I had to cheat a little on this one, but I think it worked out okay. Hopefully things in my little corner of the world will be back in some semblance of order soon and I can bring you something fresh. I truly hope your holiday season has started off well. I'll see you next month, and as always...thanks for reading. 

The Gift Of The Edalji

It's very satisfying to be able to assist someone on a project. I've had the honor of doing it quite a few times, and it's always great to see the final product. I've helped with papers, presentations, articles, and other means of relaying information about Sherlock Holmes to the world, and over the last few years I've been the chronological consultant for a book that has just come out. I was lucky enough to get a complimentary copy for helping, and it is gorgeous! Wait until you see this thing!!

It was back in June 2020 when I was first contacted about assisting with chronological questions for the story. I have no desire to give away too much, but I will say that it's Holmes and Dr. Watson getting involved in the George Edalji case in 1907. It's based on all of the actual facts in said case, but has The Great Two looking into it. Kind of fun. If you want to know more, order your own copy here. (And while you're on that site, look for my name under the 'Author' tab.) (Pretty cool, right?!)

When I got the package I was quite thrilled. It was much larger than just a book, and I wondered what was inside. Once I opened it, I saw this...

Talk about great packaging! That's a postcard resting on the paper, one you can see on the webpage I linked to above. The back had a personalized note just for me, so you don't get to see that. Once I opened that paper, I laid my eyes upon a very nicely made card with a bee on it. The card is decorative and functional - it has a magnet that helps keep some flaps that cover the book closed. 

I removed the card and opened the diagonal folds. What I saw next really knocked me sideways because it's exactly the kind of thing I would do given the chance. It's visually stunning, and quite unique.

Okay, to be fair, that's the shot from the webpage, but it's exactly what I saw. That's the box the book is in! And the "wings" are covered with newspaper pages.

Now, as if I wasn't already reeling from all of this, I removed the book itself (which contained further surprises that I'll get to in a moment) and saw this under it...

One of those surprises in the book was a little note tucked under the front cover...

Intrigued, I turned to said page and found a wee blurb about me. The Simpson's reference is there because of an idea I presented to the author. It was used, but you'll have to read the book to find out how.

The book itself is a two-parter. That was one of those surprises, too. It has three covers - top, middle, and back. See, the first part is the story itself. The case. The second part, which is attached to the first part, is acknowledgements and the research that went into the work. You read the first part, then literally flip the book end-over-end to read the second part.

It's a little unusual, but I think it's fantastic. The opening page of the first part contains an author's name, but I'll tell you that it's not the name of the person I was communicating with. I'm going to leave the reason a small mystery, but I had to tease you with it. Yes, it's an alias, but there's more to it. (Hate me yet? Lol.)

The opening page of the second part tells you what to expect in it...

Also included was this little booklet. I have always been a big fan of liner notes and annotations and endnotes and footnotes and marginalia, so naturally I flipped through this before the book itself. (Here's a problem I have - when I come to a new page in a book, my eyes are immediately drawn to asterisks and such. My instantaneous reaction is to go straight to them and read the accompanying note. I have to force myself not to. Anyone else deal with this?)

I realize, of course, that this post has about as many pictures as words, but I wanted to give you the full flavor of this masterpiece of presentation. I haven't actually read the book yet because I just got it not long ago and want to have plenty of time to drink it in properly. I have a feeling it's going to be very engaging, and I am really looking forward to that soon-to-come-weekend when it's just me and the book. I'll read it a few times (doesn't everyone do that?) and then give you an update, so look forward to that in a future post.

I will admit here that I am not an expert about the Edalji situation - something I need to rectify. I'm relieved the author didn't ask me to be a consultant about that because I would've had to turn them down. This book will go a long way toward helping me better understand the entire set of circumstances, and will be fun to read, as well. So, I will bring this post to a close so I can check my calendar for a time to enjoy my new gift. I can't actually see when you make it the bottom, so I just have to keep imagining that you do. It makes me happy, even if it may be a bit presumptive on my part. I'll see you next month, and as always...thanks for reading.

Bigfoot's In This One. Finally, Right?!

On my lunch hour at work, I like to watch videos on YouTube and check out whatever strikes my fancy for that day. I’ll watch just about anything, but I try to find something that will cause me not to get too involved in the subject. I know me, and I will become very distracted for the rest of the day and my mind will torture me if I don’t investigate more. Now, working for the government means that some people think we take three-hour lunches and at least ten coffee breaks a day. That may or may not be true, but as a federal employee I’m afraid I can say no more. One video I watched recently on my actual sanctioned break caught my attention, and it inspired this post. Let’s visit 1983, shall we?

That year a man named Mistuaka Oshima (who was working at the Panasonic Corporation) put the finishing touches on an idea about image stabilization in video and photographic form. It soon became an accepted science, and just five years later the system was first put into use in a mass-produced video camera. It’s been perfected over the years and is now a standard. It’s used in movie cameras, cell phones, crime fighting technology, and Bigfoot videos. (Watch an example here.) I know about that last one because that’s what I was watching while enjoying my canteen fare, and it got me to thinking - but not necessarily about Squatches. 

The idea of stabilization around a single item made me recall something I had mentioned in my talk at the Minnesota conference in 2016 about new and unique ways to try and construct a chronology of the Sherlock Holmes cases. One was to make a timeline using the dining table at 221B. See, if you look at the Paget drawings, you’ll notice that said table had rounded corners in some cases, while other illustrations show a sharp corner. I figured someone could use the (obviously) two different tables and make a chronology. You take the cases that have the rounded corners and group them together and then work all of the others out from that locus. Then you do the same with the ones with a sharper-cornered one. I know it sounds silly, but to me it's viable. I truly doubt the occupants of that famous flat had numerous tables they changed out from time to time, so it means they would’ve used one for a while, and then maybe got another one later for whatever reason. See what I’m getting at?

My thinking after the Bigfoot video was about applying the table logic to other things in the canon that would lend themselves to such a thing. Using a “fixed point,” if I may. It has been done with John Watson’s wives for about a hundred years, but I don’t have much faith in that. I don’t believe he was married at all before 1903, and the canon itself offers enough evidence to support it. Thus, I find it necessary to look elsewhere to build a timeline because the wife thing doesn’t work for me. (I’ll post about my claims someday, don’t worry.)

The question becomes, however, what else do we have to use besides the merry wives of Watson? Well, we also have the other detectives and/or Inspectors that appear from time to time in the cases. (Brad Keefauver did some great work on this in the latest issue of TIMELINE, the fantastic newsletter of the Sherlockian Chronologist Guild, where he laid them out by case.) I know it’s possible that those folks were on their forces for a long time, but what if they weren’t? What if one of them was only around for a short time, and yet appears in numerous cases? I think it would be okay to make the leap and then pin those cases together. 

But what about grouping all of the cases where Holmes quotes Shakespeare? Maybe he was going through a phase and fanboying on the Swan. Maybe he found a copy of the First Folio at a pawnshop. Heck, he did with a Stradivarius violin! Or perhaps one could gather up all of the times when The Dynamic Two only worked certain areas of London. Maybe it was because Dr. Watson was courting a lady friend on that side of town. And speaking of Watson’s zest for life, what about clumping the cases where he used a color in the title? Was he going through an artful phrase where he decided to use more flourishes in his writing?

I’d say any assumption is okay. The gloves are off. After all, chronologists have to ignore some things in order to make other things work. They also have to twist some facts, or make huge jumps in logic, to accommodate their findings. And I realize we only have a small part of the two men’s lives to work with, and that there were potentially thousands of cases, but it reinforces the idea that any idea is a workable one since it can’t be debated too heavily given our lack of information.

Allow me to reel this in by saying that I know just how foolish it all sounds. But think of it this way – there isn’t a definitive chronology. Some of the big names (Baring-Gould, Zeisler, Dakin) are important and loved, but I wouldn’t go anywhere near calling any of them “the one.” Shoot, we don’t even have two chronologies that perfectly match each other. So, it’s all up for grabs. And I don’t think any way of doing it is foolish. It makes it more fun for anyone to attempt their own timeline by taking some of the starch out of the process, and as I like to say - all chronology is good chronology.

Thank you for getting down this far and indulging my thoughts with me. Some people may have stopped reading about hallway through and thought perhaps my brain had finally gotten soft in these later years, but you made it - and I love it. I'll see you next month, and as always...thanks for reading.

Friends! Zordans!! Chronologists!!!

Being a part of a hobby means inner-interest trading between participants. Someone who knows your particular tastes for the ol' bookshelf will come across something and immediately think of you. Before you know it the item will be happily resting in its own spot in the case - after being perused and explored for a bit, of course. Well, that happened to me recently and it was totally unexpected and unnecessary, and that makes it even better. However, the gift came with an additional gift. That was even more unexpected.

It's not uncommon for book people to find hidden little treasures inside the leaves of a used tome. I have found many of them, but usually they're faded receipts or torn-off corners of junk mail used for a bookmark or a scribble on a piece of paper that lost its meaning years ago (and would likely even cause the writer to stare at it like a chicken watching a magic trick as they attempt to recall the meaning behind it). It could also be names and addresses of some far away person and place penned inside the cover, or scribbles from a child. Other times it's something that directly relates to the book it's in. Case in point...

I don't recall when I picked up this item, but I remember being intrigued by the fact that it was printed in Southern Illinois (where I'm from) by Southern Illinois University Press. Inside I found this...

It's a NEWS letter about the book itself! (See what I did there?) Very cool item. And it really does this old heart some good to see that address and phone number at the top (and bottom). Makes me long for my former home - a little village nestled in a col between two arms of the westernmost part of the Shawnee National Forest. Carbondale, just outside its boundaries, was about 15 miles north of where I grew up. It was a city to my small town eyes with its malls and campuses and nightlife. My childhood was spent surrounded by trees and bluffs and woodland creatures. They were as much a part of my life as my family and friends, and I do miss the comfort of their presence. (***deep sigh***) Anyway, I have a number of finds just like this, as do most folks. But we're here to talk about the one that was in my newest gifted acquisition.

Anyone in this hobby who doesn't have their earbuds in too far has heard of Ernest Bloomfield Zeisler and his incredible contribution to the Sherlockian chronology aspect of it all. His book is a landmark in this hobby, and will always be so even if you don't agree with his findings. When my friend Christopher Zordan contacted me and said he found a free copy on a table o' books, he asked me if I wanted it. (He even offered to pay for the book because it was such a great find, but the money was refused. Good for you, Chris!) I told him I was interested, and it found its way to me by post. I was thrilled. But then...

As I was thumbing through this Magico Magazine reprint copy (which is in fantastic shape and was packaged especially well) my eyes fell on handwriting. Now, to anyone with a book passion, written-in notations of ANY kind are exciting. I realized I was looking at someone's handwritten dates! I asked Chris if he'd looked in the book, and he admitted he'd seen the penciled-in bits. I guess he wanted them to be a surprise. Cheeky rascal. My shock turned to curiosity. Who wrote these? Are they their dates or those of someone else? Did we have a previously unknown chronology compiled by a mystery chronologist? 

As I looked closer it occurred to me that the dates were only written next to William S. Baring-Gould's. (That's another name you should know, by the way.) I was still faced with questions about them, so I went to my beloved database of timelines to try and see if they already existed. I'm a little sad to say that they were all dates from Baring-Gould's monumental work The Annotated Sherlock Holmes from 1967. Still, any reason to go into said database is worth it. This person was thorough enough to write in the later dates by Baring-Gould, but they didn't bother with making notations about his findings in the text of the rest of the book. I've said this many times - the dates are meaningless without explanation. If you're going to write in new information it is also necessary to show the logic behind them. However, I do understand that is a lot of extra work, so I'll step down from my soapbox. I'm getting too fired up...and I'm old!

That's Chris and I at A Scintillation of Scions in 2015 at the black-and-white only party. (I also had a pair of white sunglasses with a little while gentleman's mustache attached, but they're not shown here.) We always find something to laugh about, and it's a pleasure to see him every time I get lucky enough to do so. His thinking of me as a possible receiver of this book was wonderful. It was a pretty amazing gift with a pretty amazing extra gift from a pretty amazing guy. The great thing is that up until I got this in the mail, all I had was a photocopied version. Hard to believe, I know, but it's true. Now I have what I will refer to as the Zordan/Zeisler Enigma copy. It's the only one of its kind in the world. Can't beat that.

Well, it's that time in the post to remind you just how much I love it when you make it all the way down here. That's an appreciation that will never wane. Please take care of yourselves, and check in with me next month. I'll see you then, and as always...thanks for reading.

Standing With Giants

Something that most of you already know about me is that one day I will become a hermit. I’ll say goodbye to everyone and then basically vanish. And recently that goal (destiny?) has really gotten a huge boost, so much so that I have started keeping a journal of the things I need to do to accomplish it in the semi-near future. But my chronological cronies won’t have any of it. Even with my admissions of dreams of disappearing they continue to send me missives of all types with issues concerning our subset to pursue. Deep stuff, too. Serious quandaries a-plenty. And I love it! (I did ask them to keep me in the know, but I didn't really expect it to happen. And certainly not so fervently.) Anyway...

I had said in a recent post that even if I left it wouldn’t make any difference – the hobby of Sherlockian chronology will be just fine. We have some real powerhouses in our corner, a society which is growing, and a newsletter that is 43 issues in and showing no signs of slowing down. Brad Keefauver is one of my heroes in our journey and continues to astound me with his energy and passion. His ways of looking at what we do always amazes me because he thinks so far outside of that proverbial box. With his hand in things our efforts to bring chronology to a larger audience will never fail.

Max Magee has become that one guy that sends those emails that you just know are going to be unique and thought provoking. I’ve even had to write him back and ask for a bit more information (or a bullet point explanation) because I’d bet he types like his brain works – fast! As such he gets wrapped up in the excitement and forgets that we mortals read slower than he writes. I have several emails from him I still need to answer, I just have to find the time to wrap my brain around his thoughts and put words into sentences. I am very impressed by some of the things he comes up with, including a possible well-hidden pun from the pages of the canon that this old dog had missed. He’s another reason we’re in good shape and always will be.

Bruce Harris will remain on my list of incredible chronologists for all time. This guy has a great nose for ferreting out ideas and connections about the original cases, and it leaves me in awe. I actually feel quite inferior to him in ability and output. (Not that it’s a contest, and not that I’m anything special. Just sayin’.) Bruce and I, along with a few others, correspond with each other by typed letter. It’s very cool to drag out my 1951 Underwood Champion Finger-Flite typewriter and churn out some pages. (I named it Gregory. As in Peck. As in my style of typing. Cute, eh?) I'm often sorry I'm not in the company of these men more because the conversations are unfailingly wonderful. I waffled about going to Minneapolis this year, and when I finally convinced myself to go, I found that registration had been closed due to fullness. Sorry, boys – I wanted to be there.

Both of these men have contacted me (and others) recently about problems they’ve found in various cases. I love what they’ve discovered, and the one Bruce came up with is a doozy! I have to type my response to him, but first I have to decide if what he said in his letter is a good reason to re-think the dating of ‘The Illustrious Client’ (ILLU) or not. And it just might be. Again, I love that they keep me in the loop. That they won’t let go of my rope. They still consider me part of the group even though I’ve been a ghost for some time now. It’s an honor to be amongst all of these guys, and I truly have no desire to let them down.

As I said before, The Sherlockian Chronologist Guild is still flourishing. You can check out the website here. It all started off as an idea, as things do, and has blossomed into a nice little mailing list that keeps growing. We have quite a few members who contribute, and occasionally get what might be called a guest article from someone else out there with thoughts about chronology. If we could get everyone on the mailing list to send something in for publication, however, the whole thing would be unstoppable. It could be a thought or an idea. Or a cartoon. Or maybe even something found in an old newsletter or journal from some long-gone society. All of it is acceptable, though, because we timeliners don’t expect everyone to get as involved as we are. We just want to spread the word about our endeavor and help people understand that this part of the larger hobby can be fun and doesn’t have to cause glassy-eyed looks from others when the subject is broached.

Sometimes it feels like I repeat myself on here. I hate that, but I'm afraid my idea box has gotten low. I'm working on restocking it, though, and have come up with some good stuff. Now I just have to put in writing. So, I'll end this here and get to work. You know I adore it when you make it all the way down, and I look forward to visiting with you again. I'll see you next month, and as always...thanks for reading.

Exploring Historical Stuff - Like I Do

I often find myself in complete awe of other blogs - especially Studies in Starrett by Ray Betzner. It focuses exclusively on one person - Charles Vincent Emerson Starrett - and his incredible body of work. (Check it out here.) What amazes me is that, even with such a limited focus, Ray never seems to run out of fresh topics to talk about, and he posts several times a month! I struggle with one post a month (though I am working on changing that number). The passion for his subject is evident, and his knowledge of it is probably unsurpassed on this planet or any other. On a selfish note, I am thrilled to share the same "first" name of Vincent with Mr. Starrett, and wonder how many times I pop into Ray's head whenever he reads it. Anyway, on with the show.

Ray has always been one of my biggest cheerleaders in this fringe part of the Sherlockian hobby, and he continues to inspire me with each new blog post. He told me once when I was discussing giving up my blog here and leaving the Sherlockian life that I shouldn't quit, and that (I'm paraphrasing here), "You still have work to do." I use this as my rallying cry, my Knute Rockne speech, my carnival barker's call. It reminds me that I need to hang in there until I can't anymore. And then to keep going anyway. But, I didn't come here to talk only about Ray. He's just the opening act this month. I needed a sex symbol to get the crowd primed, and Ray unknowingly stepped into that spotlight. No, I'm here to talk about historical mysteries.

That's my buddy Jimmanee and me at a recent lecture at Crown Hill Cemetery in Indianapolis about The Underground Railroad. (That's the speaker's lower 3/4 in the background.) Jimmanee is fascinated by local history, and I am held spellbound by anything with a historical mystery attached to it. We've been hitting the road a lot here lately, and there's even more trips a-coming. It's amazing what can be found from a historical standpoint right in your own proverbial backyard, and we will likely try and look at all of it. We've driven a bunch of miles, talked a lot about Quakers, and eaten some good (and some terrible) food along the way. We've visited some pretty cool sites, though she's a bit more daring in the exploration realm once out of the car. The great thing is there's still so much more to find.

I wouldn't necessarily call the chronology work we outliers do a historical mystery, but it does qualify as a mystery in the sense that it can't be figured out. I know dozens and dozens of folks believe they have nailed it down, but we all get reminded that they may be wrong somewhere every time another timeline is studied. There's always room for improvement or adjustment, and the study of the past will always be here to help. You know I am a big advocate for tying Holmes and Watson and The Canon together using historical references and events, but some chronologists simply use the cases and their dates against each other to establish a working order for them. I like stepping outside of that. Yes, it can be done the other way, but it can't be done completely the other way. Sometimes you still have look elsewhere. The result of this thinking is me finally going through all of those books about the Victorian era that I have and seeing what I can see. (I almost never crack open any of my Holmes books, and go directly for firsthand knowledge material on the time period.)

Once again, I am aware that I'm not fulfilling my chronological post promise to you. I am working on it, though. I will start doing good, solid chronology posts very soon - just like the old days. I swear. The books and materials I have to help me in this endeavor will be a large part of my treasure finding, but I'm hoping that something Jimmanee and I come across in our travels will be able to be tied to Our Heroes in some way, too. I just need a little more time to get myself in that vein. I need time to find some good stuff to report. I need to heed Ray's words about still having work to do. And that's what I'm going to attempt. I know it's been a bumpy ride, but so far not many of you have fallen off the cart. You're still with me, and that means so very much. I look forward to our time together again next month, and as always...thanks for reading.

Is There An Archimedes In The House?

As you know, if you've read some of my posts on here lately, I've struggled with remaining in the Sherlockian hobby. I still am, but I'm working on it. I have left behind many a-hobby in the past few years, and I'm looking for something that really sparks me. This still does, but I tire of some of the sillier things that happen when you get too many humans together in a passionate pursuit. But, without going into specifics, please know that I am not referring to my fellow chronologists. They've been very encouraging and patient with me, and I am grateful. Even with my being unsure, I still want to write a blog post for you. It's not going to be deeply chronological, but more of a glimpse into the aspect of what I do here that interests me most.

I've been collecting books about the Victorian era for decades. I have so many that I'm out of room for more. (I may have to clear out others just to add to them.) The reason is that I love that time period. I was clearly born in the wrong time. I love picking them up and browsing through them. I realized, though, that I had a lot of them that I had never even given the opportunity to tell me what they held. So, I grabbed one of them off the shelf called More Wanderings in London by E. (Edward) V. (Verrall) Lucas and published in 1916. It's the follow-up to A Wanderer in London from ten years before. (He also had ones for Venice, Paris, Holland, and Florence.) It's an old library copy, and the mark on the back cover shows it was against a bookend and near a light source for waaaaay too long. See the picture below.

All of my books were bought with the idea that each one might have information in it which would help in my endeavor here. This particular one surprised me with a fact on the first opening - "I might mention that St. Mary Le Bone is not, as some have thought, a corruption of Le Bonne, but it has reference to the Bourne, the stream also called Tybourn, which once flowed here." Well, I was not aware of that. I don't know if it could help date a Sherlock Holmes case, but it's a cool tidbit. In a later chapter I find something more of note...

"Pancras is like Marylebone, Marylebone is like Paddington; all the streets resemble each other, you must read the names of the squares before you venture to knock at a door. The amount of building capital ought to have produced a great city...Marylebone alone ought to have produced a revolution in our domestic architecture. It did nothing. It was built by Act of Parliament. Parliament prescribed even a façade. It is Parliament to whom we are indebted for your Gloucester Places, and Baker Streets, and Harley Streets, and Wimpole Streets, and all those flat, dull, spiritless streets, resembling each other like a large family of plain children, with Portman Square for their respectable parents...The power that produced Baker Street as a model for street architecture in its celebrated Building Act, is the power that prevented Whitehall from being completed, and which sold to foreigners all the pictures which the King of England had collected to civilise his people."

The above, though in this book, is from Tancred by Benjamin Disreali. Tancred was published in 1847, and ol' Ben was really not impressed with London's architects at the time. It would've continued, I suspect, since the buildings on those streets remained largely unchanged by the time Holmes and Watson arrived in the early 1880's. It does make me wonder if Holmes chose the place because of the simpleness. The elementary nature of them. (See, it's all connected. Heck, maybe the first time Holmes said the infamous non-canonical line to Watson was if The Good Doctor asked The Great Detective why he chose such a drab setting to live in. "Because they're elementary, my dear Watson.")

Every page in a book like this has something that anyone interested in history would find fascinating. I read a good chunk of it, but didn't find a lot I felt could be used in what we do in the Sherlockian Chronologist Guild. I suppose I could make some extreme leaps and tie something obscure to a case, but that isn't what we need. We require hard evidence and facts. Things that directly affect a date have to have substance. That's what all of the other books are for. One, or more, of them has to have something in it that can be utilized in our struggle. So, I'll keep reading. They should supply me with plenty of posts to come.

You know, I had a light-bulb moment while editing this. For over a decade now I have felt the importance of bringing you the Sherlockian chronology world. I understood that there were so few people reporting on this part of the hobby, and even fewer places to find information. I never took that lightly. I'm not quitting this blog or my work, but I think I can safely take it down a notch. We have so many more voices in on the journey. So many great minds with fresh eyes are coming in and making themselves known. The future of our subset is in good hands. I can look in from the fringes and have a little more fun with all of this. Our very own newsletter, TIMELINE, has now become the sun for our little universe. Everything revolves around it, and it should because it's a great publication.

I find this revelation to be a great thing for me. Not only do I get to keep enjoying bringing you these posts about the far corners of the Sherlockian chronology world, but I get to do it with a lighter touch. Sort of like that reporter on the mid-morning news who gets to travel to all the odd and unique places around the area. The biggest difference is I get to do it for a time period from over 125 years ago. I think I love this. And I'm so glad the idea came to me. I think I'll have a nice dinner to celebrate. I'd ask you to join me, but I have research to do. So, I'll say goodday here, and look forward to our time together next month. See you then, and as always...thanks for reading.

A Page Of Examples Of Example Pages

It's amazing what one can gather up in the name of a hobby over time. You start looking through old files and photos with the intention of doing a little housecleaning, and you see things that you cannot for the life of you remember why you saved them. Still, it's fun to go through some of them and see what's there. I did that this last week, and I noticed something specific that I seem to have a knack for collecting. The problem is that I never actually use them. Let me explain.

I was actually looking for a specific thing that I thought would make an interesting blog post, and while I never did find it, I did come across several examples of the thing I talked about above. See, I'm an "all-the-information-in-one-place" kind of guy. Spreadsheets and charts and graphs and lists - those are my bread and butter. It does leave me at a disadvantage when talking to fellow chronologists, though, because my knowledge can often be limited to just those black and white stats. Luckily we have others who think much, much deeper than I do about our beloved subset, so I can be drawn back onto the right path, as it were. But, on to that thing I have so many of.

It seems I have a love for example listings. (There might be a better term, but I can't think of one.) The one above is an advertisement for different types of headwear for men. For some reason I didn't record where I found it, nor what year it's from, but it's almost obviously from the 1880s or 90s. Chances are I didn't think I would ever have to use it, so I just stuck it in a folder with a generic title. The one below at least has that missing date and publication included.

From there we go to another familiar territory - modes of transportation...

I even have one that makes no sense to me at all...

All of these were at one time, I'm sure, meant to be able to be used to help date a case or cases. I think the whole thing started when I read about Holmes and Watson discussing Henry Baker's hat in 'The Blue Carbuncle' (BLUE). Holmes says that the hat is three years old. He added, "These flat brims curled at the edge came in then." My guess is I started looking for info about hats to see this for myself, and an obsession was born. (I have several about chapeaus, by the way.) So, I likely began a journey of gathering such data with the belief I would employ it at some time. Problem is that I never really have. Still, I'm very attracted to these types of comparison or advertising sheets. And that goes for anything. If someone has taken the time to compile different examples of something in one place, I'm in! I find it fascinating, no matter the subject. Heck, I even did a paper in high school where I compared all the ways Elvis styled his hair througout his career and how it changed over time. Again, no matter the subject.

I don't know if anything like these would be helpful to the cause anymore. The best it could hope to do would be to correct an error, but Sherlockians have studied every word of the Canon - there's almost nothing left to examine. Still, it's interesting to have this stuff at my fingertips. And there are so many more to gather up. Sheets can be found that compare just about anything, and with access to the world wide web it seems one can be made for almost anything. Maybe there's a cottage industry in this.

You know how much I love it when you get this far down the post. It means everything to me. Reminds me of why I do this. I'll see you next month. Be good to yourself, and as always...thanks for reading.