Karnak

I already watched some of them and I love it. Maybe I am going to watch the whole episodes but, this time, in chronological order, please.

Even with that, there are some mistakes that cannot be forgiven. I also like to write (I write, but I am not a writer) and I can't conceive not only those chronological mistakes but also simple maths mistakes. And speaking about that, I am now at the start of "the veiled lodger" and just at the very beginning we have another inconsistency: Watson said Holmes' career was 23 years, 17 of those were with him cooperating. Well, considering that Holmes retired December 1903, since 1875 we have 28 years, and since 1881, 22 years. I mean, I am sure ACD knew some simple maths, didn't he? It is not an excuse (at least for me), that he didn't like the character much. I will always love SH, but for those kind of things is that I found the original stories kinda disappointing, and I have a lot to say about how the stories are written. I have no doubt that SH has trascended due to his many adaptations rather than the original stories. And may sound like a cliché, but I consider that the best adaptation by far is BBC's Sherlock. By the way, can anyone really believe that Sherlock Holmes retired in 1903 until his death in 1957? Because I DON'T. A man that was constantly craving a crime to occur, a man that shot at the wall when he was bored, etc, he retired to Sussex to be a beekeeper. That's where I think ACD could have written something more interesting for Holmes' end, such as being shoted, or making him have a terminal ill from 1903 to 1914. Those things would justify that he retired. But sorry, I am just venting. With that, I am three stories away from finishing, and having read all of them in a row for four months, I would lie if I say it has been an adventure that I haven't enjoy.

Holmes refers to the market in "The blue carbuncle", but to the ROH in this one, both saying "Covent Garden". The Wikipedia says "Former names: Theatre Royal, Covent Garden (until 1892)". That's why I thought we could not discard that this story could take place before Holmes' return. But if, as you said, "when you doctored" means "when you practiced the medicine as a doctor", then, as Chronologist said, this story can only take place after the returning of Holmes and before Watson's second marriage. So I admit my mistake and I apologize.

Another mistake of many others. I cannot take seriously a writer that doesn't know how to count. He could have used his fingers if needed. Another thing: there is no explanation about why the professor had this nine-days interval break, I mean, why did he have two episodes in a row, the night of the 4th and the night of the 5th, for what Holmes said that would suppose a difficulty. With everything, though, I found the story inreresting and kinda creepy. I liked it.

Why is "The mazarin stone" in third person?

Couldn't "when you doctored" mean "when you received the title as a doctor"? In spanish this is the case, apparently. Also, I noticed a detail: in the last sentence, Holmes refers to the Royal Opera House as "Covent Garden" instead. I looked at it, and it seems that "Covent Garden" was renamed "Royal Opera House" in 1892, but I also saw that some people still refers at it as Covent Garden nowadays, due to the market where is located. This made me think that maybe the case date could be before 1891 (Holmes' "death"), but it would certainly be a trouble placing it in the years of Watson's marriage since he seems living with Holmes in this story. I also thought that maybe Holmes calls it that way because he was used to, but placing this story in 1901 or 1902 gives Holmes 10 years to be accostumed to it. Anyways, I'm gonna follow Chronologist's date since I have no more info to try to place it on another date, but I am very reticent abiut this one.

In spanish the title is "La granja Abbey". And about Chronologist not following the post, it's okay, I just wanted to point it, the date given by Chronologist doesn't need to change since he wrote "winter, early", so it's still true. Thanks for the welcoming. I am following Chronologist's chronology since I am reading the Holmesian stories for the first time, and I agree on the 95 % although I have a few stories that I placed different based on my criteria, like for example, I placed "The Boscombe Valley mistery" in 1889 because the date given is Monday 3rd of June and this is only possible in 1889, but Chronologist placed it in 1888 because he said the year was not given, but didn't notice about the Monday thing, apparently. Anyways, I'm having fun making the chronology, although not liking the majority of the Holmes' stories. Yes, sorry, but they are being a complete disappointment.

I have just read this story and I think there is a bit of an inconsistency here (not a big deal though). I downloaded the English version (I read it in spanish) and It doesn't say "towards the end of the winter of '97", but instead it says "It was on a bitterly cold and frosty morning during the winter of '97". This can only be January, because according to Theresa Wright, she and Mary Fraser met Sir Eustace on July '95, eighteen months ago, so if we count, we have December '96, but we can stablish that if they met mid or end of July, January '97 would be a bit more of 18 months but not 19 yet. In any case, this would not be "the end of the winter".