Talk:Undated Letter written to Anandmayee 008: Difference between revisions
(Created page with "There are two angles to be explored here: What letter (and its date) is this letter a PS of/after and how can we know? And what about those marks and numbers? Are they 35 or 3...") |
Dhyanantar (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
| Line 6: | Line 6: | ||
So be it! So now we have to lean in the direction of this 008 PS being paired with Nov 18. And its place among the image file numbers also supports this view. 863, right after 862 and before 864, another image of the same Nov 18 letter. At first glance, the Nov 18 letter looks complete, with a signature, and no sign that it needs a PS, yet with lots of room to write one, not to mention a whole back side, but this observation cannot compete with the numbers. -- doofus-9 05:57, 29 November 2019 (UTC) | So be it! So now we have to lean in the direction of this 008 PS being paired with Nov 18. And its place among the image file numbers also supports this view. 863, right after 862 and before 864, another image of the same Nov 18 letter. At first glance, the Nov 18 letter looks complete, with a signature, and no sign that it needs a PS, yet with lots of room to write one, not to mention a whole back side, but this observation cannot compete with the numbers. -- doofus-9 05:57, 29 November 2019 (UTC) | ||
---- | |||
It needs to add that "xxx" in [[Letter written on 28 Nov 1961 pm]] says about contination. | |||
Above clues are enough on my opinion on marry PS with this letter. Agree?--DhyanAntar 10:58, 18 January 2020 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 10:58, 18 January 2020
There are two angles to be explored here: What letter (and its date) is this letter a PS of/after and how can we know? And what about those marks and numbers? Are they 35 or 37? 61, 62 or 63? As it happens, getting clear about one of these things may help to lead to the other. So let's start by looking at the connection that was hinted at with Letter written on 28 Nov 1961 pm.
One obvious connection is that these two letters, or halves of letters, are written on the first and so far only two examples of a previously unseen letterhead. To call it a letterhead may even be a bit of an exaggeration. They could just be pieces of paper lying around that had a bit of empty space. The first Committee "letterhead" used in Letter written on 25 Nov 1960 was similarly crowded and busy, not the kind of letterhead used routinely. So, that these "two" letters, one just a PS without a greeting, both used the same odd letterhead is suggestive of being used on the same occasion.
And what might the numbers suggest? Well, first we might want to know what exactly the numbers are. So what do you see there in the upper right corner of this undated PS? 35 would suggest it should be paired with Letter written on 18 Nov 1961, whose numbers are clearly and unambiguously 35 and 61, while 37 would lead somewhere else. Looking closely at 008's numbers, we can now see that the style of its putative 61 is very similar to that of Nov 18's 61. And now, quite frankly, that 35/37 is looking more like 35.
So be it! So now we have to lean in the direction of this 008 PS being paired with Nov 18. And its place among the image file numbers also supports this view. 863, right after 862 and before 864, another image of the same Nov 18 letter. At first glance, the Nov 18 letter looks complete, with a signature, and no sign that it needs a PS, yet with lots of room to write one, not to mention a whole back side, but this observation cannot compete with the numbers. -- doofus-9 05:57, 29 November 2019 (UTC)
It needs to add that "xxx" in Letter written on 28 Nov 1961 pm says about contination.
Above clues are enough on my opinion on marry PS with this letter. Agree?--DhyanAntar 10:58, 18 January 2020 (UTC)
