|
Peter Ewart
| Joined: 31 Aug 2005 |
| Posts: 1797 |
| Location: Near Canterbury, Kent, England. |
|
|
 Posted: Wed Sep 27, 2006 8:47 am |
|
 |
 |
|
|
Couldn't have put it better myself, Dawn.
With the greatest respect, DD, you have changed what you have said several times about the supposed or doubted provenance of the band in your photographs, each time covering yourself by asserting that you cannot speak for its provenance yourself while still insisting that there are, somewhere, undoubtedly bands of this sort about with provenance and being apparently surprised that the contributors here don't go along with even that claim.
Your posting of yesterday's dated does not tie in at all with those you offered on the 13th, 23rd and 25th August. Further, in your contributions of 20th and 21st Sep you begin several questions with "Do you deny ...?" - to each of which I, for one, would answer "yes" and hardly think I'd be alone. While not doubting that among the junk in some museums purporting to have come at some time from the Isandlwana battlefield there may be an ammunition box copper band or two, in 40 years I have never read a single claim from a reputable AZW historian that a copper band found at Isandlwana - cut or uncut - is likely to have any bearing on our understanding of the development or result of the battle. You say, however, that these people are out there making these claims. Well who?
I appreciate that your interest is in the forensic nature of the argument only, but you have repeatedly claimed that there are those who believe there are cut copper bands around (claimed to have come from Isandlwana) which can help. Well, where?
The Morris claim is well known and universally ridiculed. Are you now saying he is not alone?
Peter
|
|
|
[/i]