Saying Goodbye For A While

Recently I was fortunate enough to be able to attend a fantastic gathering of the faithful in Dayton, OH, known as Holmes, Doyle, & Friends. A very full house of Sherlockians gathered in to hear some great papers, see old chums, and get to enjoy laughter and hugs from those we see all too infrequently (at least in my case). Also, the Sherlockian Chronologist Guild was able to give each attendee a copy of our new Handbook, and it made quite the impression. People were really enjoying it and asking all involved with it to sign their names inside. Plus, I got to have some fine talks with some fine folks, and came away with a lot to think about. The result follows.

I'm going to take a break. I don't know for how long. There's still so much to talk about and cover, but I need to refresh my brain and my interest in our hobby (if I can). My chronological buddies gave me some great advice, and I have done much contemplating regarding what they said about a possible hiatus. Also, life for me in the next six months may take a drastic turn, and I have no idea when that might happen. I do know, however, that this blog sometimes feels like work, and that only makes the output suffer. It's also not fair to you, my readers. If I can't read my stuff and feel the fun and energy in the finished product, then I know you definitely can't.

So, I'm going to step away for a while. Now, I realize that it means some of you may not be here when I come back, and I've weighed that, but I still need to do this. I'll keep posting occasionally on my Facebook page, but this part of the Historical Sherlock world will go into hibernation until I figure out what to do next.

See, the older I get, the more I realize that belonging to groups or clubs just isn't something I want or need. I'll stick with a few, of course, but mostly I'll just be a nonentity. (I'm completely okay with that, by the way.) A lot of people in this hobby won't be shocked by this since I haven't really hidden my feelings about it. My good friends will know I'm not going to stop being their friend, but that our hugs and handshakes will grow farther and farther apart.

As far as I know, this is not goodbye. No swan song. No parting words. This is simply me stepping back and deciding what comes next. I am aware that this is just a hobby and probably shouldn't be taken so seriously, but when any grouping of humans with a common interest grows so large, it seems to become less about the subject and more about other things. So, I'll let everyone do what they do and simply step aside. 

Please understand that I'm not angry. I don't hate the Sherlockian world. I've simply lost my desire to produce a good product that makes others think and want to do their own research. I can't slap words on a page on then forget about it - there has to be a spark for someone to get excited about. Heck, one tiny little annotation in a book is how I got started! It grabbed me, shook me, and the result was what you've been reading all these years. The presentations and podcast interviews and papers and blog posts and articles and anthology entries and pastiches and consultations and social media posts and computer files and emails and toasts and columns and database spreadsheets and conversations all started with one small paragraph, and that is precisely what I've wanted to do for others. But, I have to be inspired to do it, and my words won't do that for someone else if I'm not feeling it. Life is cyclical, though, so maybe it'll revive. 

I adore all of you, and love your loyalty to my journey here. Perhaps we'll pick up right where we left off someday, or I'll come back just long enough to say "so long." I don't know at the moment. What I do know is that it has always been both an honor and a pleasure and a privilege to write for you. (Did you notice I said "both" but listed three things? That's a Col. Blake quote from M*A*S*H. I love that show.) I'll see you sometime in the future, and as always...thank you so very much for reading.

I'll Bet Mycroft Never Had This Problem

It's not always easy coming up with something to write about. I realize I only put out a post once a month while others type away with a constancy that surprises everyone, but that one post can be taxing. I would love to be more prolific on here, but my time is usually taken up by other writing assignments. Still, I enjoy doing this, so I write even when I don't have a topic. And today is one of those days.

A lot of my time recently (okay, this past month) has been spent worrying about my job. I'm not going to get political on here, and I won't run anyone down for the choices they made in the last election, but every day I wake up not knowing if I still need to go into work. See, I'm a federal employee. Have been for over twelve years. My record is spotless, and I have given my all to what I do. I have won many awards and bonuses, and have been recognized in various ways for my skill and dedication. I've even earned the nickname Mr. Integrity because I choose to practice the adage that honesty benefits everyone. My bosses and co-workers trust what I say, and I return their faith in me by not lying to them. I've also never had a complaint against me, nor ever been investigated or written up - not even a verbal warning. (I've never even been late in all that time. Really.) But, I am not a bragging man. These are simply facts. I'm a great employee...and it makes no difference right now.

I understand some of what's going on, and I get what is trying to be accomplished, but it's a scary time since my particular department is not exempt from what's happening. Please know that I'm not complaining. Whatever the outcome is, it's one I'll live with, and if released, I'll look back on my time with the government very happy with my performance. 

The reason I am telling you all of this is so you get why there's no real subject this time. I've worked on other Sherlockian things, so I'm keeping my fingers pecking for Holmes and Watson, but as the end of this month drew nearer and nearer, I had a feeling I wouldn't have any gas left in that tank. And I didn't. My life was already in a bit of a fog, and now it's in a darker one. I did consider writing something about Mycroft and his role in his government at the time, but I didn't open a single book in my collection to start it. I'm also going to be selling or donating most of my library, and a large chunk of it is titles about late-Victorian London. I thought about that, too, but couldn't find the strength. Oh, I'm attending the Holmes, Doyle, & Friends conference in Dayton next month, so maybe that'll lift my spirits. I guess we'll see. And I'm a little stoked about the surprise the Sherlockian Chronologist Guild is going to introduce to the world at that event, so there's that. (Hopefully I'll still be employed by then.)

At this very moment I am sitting in a restaurant. I've finished my meal and have been allowed to stay here as long as needed to work on this. (They're used to me here, and know this is the sort of thing I do.) When I left work today, the uncertainty about tomorrow was even greater (due to several new factors), and I had to decide between going to bed as soon as I got home and just laying there in the dark trying to figure out what I may be forced to do next, or get something in my stomach and write this. I chose the latter. Happily. But, please do not think for a second that I'm putting all of this before you for sympathy. Far from it. I'm just being honest with you. This is my situation right now, and it's a bleak one. I require no words of encouragement or platitudes, I'm just getting this off my chest to help explain (in part) my lack of a decent post.

I still have my grandchildren for joy, and going out to eat is still something I like, but worrying every minute about hearing my text notification sound go off and seeing it's from my Supervisor is making me a little crazy. I have a back-up plan, sort of, but it isn't necessarily one I want 100%. I have options, but a lot of people don't. I'm happy I've gotten myself into that position, but I still don't want to have to act upon it. And for the record, I am stating once more that this is not a political post. I usually don't bother with such things. Frankly, it bores me to tears. But, people are allowed their opinions, so I'll say no more. Again, this is just what's going on, and I'm in the middle of it pretty deep. All I've done is my job - very well, I might add - but the world is ever-changing, and it isn't always in a good way.

There may come a time when I might need a break to get my life on another track. Or perhaps I won't be writing this blog anymore. Or maybe neither of those will come to fruition. It's impossible to know such things, however. I am certain I'm not ready to give it up, though I can't say what will come next for me. I'll try not to ever write something like this again, and instead get back to the business of talking about Sherlockian chronology. I've done it for so long I don't think I could ever fully walk away from it. Nor do I want to leave you, my loyal readers. Hopefully I won't have to. I fully expect to see you next month, so I'll just end here. See you soon, and as always...thanks for reading.

The OTHER Chronologists

 As usual, I'm going to warn against the excessive use of the word chronology. Yes, there are other words like timeline, sequence, history, and the close linguistic relative of chronicle. But, we are known as chronologists. We study Sherlockian chronology. We brush our teeth with Baring-Gould, and gargle with Zeisler. (Okay, that's a bit much, but you can see what I mean.) Still, it's the word everyone uses when discussing the timeline problems in the canon, and I have to follow suit. But, is our kind of chronology the only kind? Allow me to explain.

Seems there are many types of Sherlockian chronology - maybe even kinds that don't cause people to get all glassy-eyed and sleepy. And it's everywhere. You probably have some of it on your shelves right now. I'm talking about those that place timelines on other things related to Holmes and Dr. Watson. We are all familiar with the chronology of the life of Arthur Conan Doyle. As more research is done on him, more is found, and more updates are needed. To me, that's wonderful. Ol' Arthur isn't a big draw for me personally, but without his part in all of this, I wouldn't be here talking about it. There are those who do pursue him, though. Matt Laffey and Mattias Boström have a series of books out that track the known instances where Holmes and Doyle appeared in newspapers around the world in the sequence in which they occurred. It may not fall under the same umbrella that we stand beneath, but it's chronology.

Recently I came across a blog that was all about soundtracks and scores for movies, and placing them in the correct order that they appear in the film. Seems the order that's listed in the film credits isn't always accurate. I mention this because the blogpost from them that was on my feed was about the first Downey, Jr. / Law film. It goes quite deep. Called Chrono-score, it not only covers the bonus tracks, but also the theater version versus the commercial release version and the differences in the music. And then it does something that goes after my own heart - it discusses the recording sessions and what order the pieces were recorded in. Now that's dedication! I can't imagine anyone needing all of this, and the site plainly states on its header that it's for informational purposes only, but I applaud their fortitude.

In the back of the Sherlockian Chronologist Guild newsletter TIMELINE is a listing of all known chronologically-based works that have been put out over the last 100+ years. It's an ongoing project as new pieces come out, or are discovered, with some regularity. It is a true Sherlockian Sherlockian chronology chronology. (I think that's a legitimate sentence.) We all know that a new article or paper can appear seemingly out of nowhere, and like the Doyle chronology, Brad Keefauver (publisher of the newsletter) makes sure the list is updated when it does.

The last example I have of this kind of thing is from a conversation I had with someone, though I cannot for the life of me remember who. I also seem to recall reading about it somewhere, but again - no idea. The idea was about the Jeremy Brett / Edward Hardwicke episode for Granada of 'The Musgrave Ritual' (MUSG). Mention was made of the fact that the Holmes and Watson were in it from beginning to end. (Based on the original story, that's very wrong.) And that they were of advanced years. (Based on the original story, that's also very wrong.) We discussed if I had ever considered trying to figure out a chronology of Holmes movies and TV shows. Basically, it would be interesting to figure out the dates the shows are trying to portray, and making a chronology out of that. In the case of the Granada episode, for example, MUSG would be much later than the accepted early chronological dates we hold as true. See what I'm getting at? I remember thinking it wouldn't be totally impossible, and would be a fascinating endeavor. I think this would also be considered Sherlockian chronology. Different, yes, but you know what I like to say - all chronology is good chronology.

So, it seems that other people are dabbling in our trade without being "orthodox" chronologists themselves. They don't even know they should be sitting at our table at a party! They've unknowingly contributed to our cause, and there's plenty of room for more of them. It's a big table. And there's going to be a seat for you here anytime you want to sit for a spell. Stop by whenever the fancy strikes you, and enjoy yourself. We'll all gather right back here next month for another installment of my Sherlockian chronology thoughts and adventures. I'll see you then, and as always...thanks for reading.

A New Flame From An Old Name

It's amazing how one little incident can pull you out of a funk. How a single idea or need will bring back a passion that lay dormant for far too long. I think you can see where this is going, so it would be unnecessary for me to tell you that I experienced just that very thing recently - but I will anyway. (Like I just did.) I pride myself on my unusual ways of relating information to the masses. The manner in which I approach a project is something I don't work very hard at as it comes to me quite naturally. I like that trait. It keeps eyes on the proverbial (or real) page or butts in seats. All good things. So, when I was asked to contribute to an upcoming book, my mind immediately clicked with an idea.

Stated by me many times before is the fact that I am always honored when I get asked to be a part of something that others will read or hear. Something that would certainly be successful without my name ever coming near it. (And, no, I'm not implying at all that my inclusion would help with any success.) Still, it has happened again, and I was thrilled to be asked and respond immediately with my acceptance of the assignment.

The piece will be about our Patron Saint of Sherlockian Chronology - Helen Elizabeth Wilson. Luckily and happily I am quite familiar with her and what she unknowingly did for our hobby. My initial worry was that I might not have anything new to say about the situation, but I trusted my gut and peaked behind all those doors in my brain to see if any of them harbored a fresh way to relay her story. In usual fashion, one stumbled out. I had the opener, but still needed to define the remainder of the text. This blog entry is only about said opener because I don't have the rest outlined.

The first thing I needed was a specific date relating directly to Sherlock Holmes. It was an easy find since our ilk loves to impart information about him to every corner of the internet. Then I looked for a date associated with that date. After that I looked for something in old newspapers that would assist me on the journey. I found all of those things, and have the basis for my article. But you might be wondering what this has to do with rekindling an old flame of interest. Well, I had jumped on a site I used to love going onto, but have neglected - Newspapers.com.

See, my life has been a struggle lately. I shan't go into details, but you've all seen me hint at it on entries of late. I have subscriptions to a number of fantastic websites that offer incredible historical data, but I just haven't been on them in a while. (Heck, sometimes I drive all the way to my mom's in southern Illinois without turning on the radio - and I've been a SiriusXM subscriber for over two decades!) As soon as I jumped on the site and logged in, I was instantly transported back to those days when I would sit and do nothing else but read those old papers and make notes about things to research later. The glory days. This, though, has the potential to be a turning point. I subscribe to a British newspaper site, too, and I have a feeling I'm going to be looking at it more often.

The rush of excitement I had looking for the dates I was talking about above was refreshing. The old typefaces, the terminology, the obvious (and likely expected) plagiarism, and the access to lost stories from our past is a historian's dream. I'm so very happy I signed in. Now it will be a place of comfort for me for weeks, maybe even months. Perhaps I'll even traipse through those pages on my desktop computer because it needs the action. I've been on it only twice this year. No joke. Seems it only exists anymore to hold up the light layer of dust that accumulates along its features.

Maybe this will be the beginning of a renewal in what I have become known for. Maybe I'll find the desire to start attacking Sherlockian chronology the way I did before. Maybe that old spark will return and I get can get back to helping my cronies convince the world that our plight is an honest, fun, and worthwhile one. Maybe this is what I need to get out the doldrums. Maybe.

If you've read anything I've written about Ms. Wilson then you know I found, and have been in contact with, a relative of hers. When this offer came in I reached out to her to tell her about the project and asked if it was okay to use her name. (I would never do so without asking.) She assured me that was fine, and then offered me a surprise - new information about Helen! It's not anything earth-shattering, but it just goes to show that there's always something new to uncover. So, off to work I go. Seeing you all the way down here never fails to please me, so I'll give you another chance to do so next month. I'll see you then, and as always...thanks for reading.

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.