3 ms·
His evidence is quoted directly from the letter where the letter writer says the men who accosted him might have confused him with someone they knew. It’s as g
by zaroth 7y ago
His evidence is quoted directly from the letter where the letter writer says the men who accosted him might have confused him with someone they knew.
It’s as good as analysis of a single stand-alone 1850s letter gets. That is to say, it’s a narrative based on a massive string of assumptions and contextual clues.
- ComputerGuru 7y agoThat’s not what the quote said. It was “that he might have something in common with a friend or brother of the crowd,” which I took to mean that “they thought he might share their sexual proclivities.”
- angry_octet 7y agoWell that isn't evidence, that can barely be called conjecture. If it had been buttressed with references to other contemporary documents (arrest records, diary entries etc) it would have some weight.
- zaroth 7y agoHence my second paragraph?