Duane Bozarth wrote:
"George E. Cawthon" wrote:

Duane Bozarth wrote:

TURTLE wrote:
...


Well can you substantiate that everything you read on the internet is true ?


No, obviously. But I can at least corroborate the basics of the
establisment of Sears/Roebuck w/ past knowledge obtained from
grandparents who were around at the time amongst other ways.

There's no indication that virtually any of the "history" you posted had
any basis in fact.

I doubt you can corroborate anything from your
grandparents. Old enough to know anything in 1990
would mean being born in 1880 or earlier so they
would be at least 125 years old? ...


I didn't say they were currently living, did I? In fact, I
specifically said "w/ past knowledge". I was 12 when my grandfather
passed away at a reasonably ripe old age in 1957. A calculation from
there would show him to have easily been cognizant of the time period.

It just so happens that my grandfather as a young man also worked for a
railroad and used watches (and in fact, we have two still--one works and
keeps nearly perfect time to this day, the other was damaged in an
accident) similar to those initial ones which he purchased through
Sears. Being as he was interested, he did have specific knowledge of
the past history which I am confident is much more nearly accurate than
that TURTLE posted which was just blantantly wrong in gross areas, not
just detail.

He was mixing in stuff from things like the Hudson Bay Co and all that
sort of lore which I just knew was not correct. It would, as you note,
certainly not take too much effort to disprove any major facets of the
history as posted by Sears.

Well, I do miss somethings. You may have taken my
comment on oral histories too personally. My
criticism of oral histories is general, not
specific as I certainly didn't mean to cast
aspersions on your GF. Any single oral history
may be absolutely accurate, I know a lot of stuff
my dad told me was, but I know that not because he
told me, but because other sources confirmed it.