Pat,
To be honest, the differences in our interpretations still lie in whether the bottom of page 187 is a retelling of the story, or a continuation of the timeline, after an odd insertion of wanting to play golf in nature, which seems totally out of place.
As usual, I think most of this discussion is semantics based on that difference of opinion, although I still will believe the option existed until proven otherwise.
Just in case I am reading things wrong on that, I would appreciate your interpretation of just why taking an option AFTER determining the specific land would be necessary. Why do you say they cannot take an option for an undetermined parcel of 205 acres within a specific 450 acre parcel? What do you think the purpose of the option was?
Jim,
I did offer that potential to line up investors in a post above. I think he had his promises for $60K in subscriptions, but not the money in hand. I found it odd that CBM would use that Dec. article to tell subscribers to send their money in. The other article sounds more like he is just starting to go out and find subscribers, but I don't believe that was the case.
But, if existing subscribers hadn't actually sent in money, then the option could have solely been for the purpose of providing time for the collecting funds to pay off the $40K. Also, the article notes that CBM was forming a temporary holding company until the final one was in place, so that could be a legal requirement to transfer the land to the final corporation.
However, both those articles say that as of Dec. 1906, the land boundary was not yet firmly settled, even though it had been “purchased” which we know is having been optioned for purchase.
Given this direct evidence from two different newspaper sources, both quoting CBM and going into great detail (and probably able to access the land purchase records from the county recorder of deeds, too) I find it hard to believe anyone would seriously argue that the boundaries were completely fixed, and justify it by ignoring contemporaneous accounts, or quoting third party observers like Behr. I don't know where or when Behr wrote of NGLA, but I agree with Phil, that it couldn't have been contemporaneous, and he was not a direct participant.
So, to answer your question about when the routing was fixed, it could still be a work in progress, with unknown finality at the time of purchase. As I said before, I have no doubt that they picked up on the land for the Alps, Cape and Redan holes on an early pony ride, and even reference those. But, the contemporary articles also sound like they hadn't connected the dots yet with the non template holes by December 1906, at least to me.
Given CB had been working with the realty company since about June on another parcel, and that they directed him to the next site, he might have been riding that site on ponies many times and for many months, firming up his ideas substantially each time. His account in Scotlands Gift doesn't give exact dates for the pony rides, subsequent visits, etc., so its all an assumption as to exactly when those were made. As I said, the first telling makes it sound like the decision to buy came between the initial tours and the earnest study to finalize the routing. I am just not sure that the dates mentioned for the option and purchase are perfectly chronological in SG, and supplement that with the newspaper articles, which tell us the routing had not been finalized as of Dec 1906.
And, again, I am not sure it really matters that much to how the project turned out whether he routed most of it pre option or most of it post option, or if he only made minor tweaks post option. No doubt it was an ongoing process, as routing always is, and that the insertion of the "legal" dates of option and final purchase had any effect on what was in essence an continous period of refinement from the day CBM decided to buy that particular parcel. The other factors that drove the design didn't change - the Inn, being the biggest example.