Subject: Tin Bigha redux
Date: Apr 04, 2005 @ 10:42
Author: Brendan Whyte (Brendan Whyte <bwhyte@...>)
Prev Post in Topic Next [All Posts]
Prev Post in Time Next
>Message: 3You misunderstand Prof. Elahi's article. 1952 was the date of the first
> Date: Sun, 3 Apr 2005 10:44:12 -0700 (PDT)
> From: aletheia kallos <aletheiak@...>
>Subject: Re: Re: Tin Bigha
>
>here is another guess even more in line with arifs
>
>since 3bigha is also just another way of saying an acre as suggested by
>the data given here & elsewhere ive seen
>http://www.unc.edu/~rowlett/units/dictB.html
>then the comment made here
>http://banglapedia.search.com.bd/HT/E_0054.htm
>that an acre of land was agreed to be set aside for this corridor since
>1952 suggests to me that the parcel may actually have acquired its name in
>theory & principle & that it may actually have been in use for many years
>before it was determined exactly which acre or parcel it was to be
>& that when the actual parcel was finally agreed upon & laid out after
>having for some reason nearly quadrupled in size its functional name had
>already been determined & thus naturally continued to be applied even tho
>no longer literally applicable & my further guess is that the reason it
>nearly quadrupled in size may have been to permit a minimum feasible or
>practicable width for since its 178 meter length was already determined
>by the length of the gap it had to bridge its width would have had to
>shrink from its present 85 meters to less than 23 meters in order for its
>3bigha name to still have been true & all the stuff shown here might never
>have fit into so narrow a strip
>http://exclave.info/tin-bigha/tinbighamap.jpg