Can't quite apprehend the non-point you seem to be making, Ed T. What is 'achieved' is a provisional terminus a quo. I have named a couple of earlier sources than those cited, but have nowhere claimed to have 'established' anything. So what's your problem, precisely?

The gravamen is surely that the attribution of a quote above, 9 Oct 0838pm, is demonstrably not the original source. Do you think it should have been allowed to stand because the absolute ur-original source cannot be conclusively demonstrated? If that is your point, I think little of your standards. If it isn't, then what the hell is, pray?

≈M≈