Author: NickDanger
Tuesday, 04 January 2000 - 03:30 am |        |
Hi all,
Thanks Leanne, Dave Radka and CMD for your information. It had got me thinking again just what we really know about the graffito. I don't think there is even a consensus about at what height it was written. I must check further, but I could have sworn I came across a description that said 'round school boy hand'.
Those I have checked with so far seem to be in agreement that the graffito was written in cursive script. I would still be interested to know if anyone else has tried the writing experiment. I would be very interested in hearing what you found. Clearly we know the intended subject of the message was the Jews. Since 'Juwes' was the only word that appears to have been misspelled, perhaps it is slightly less of a puzzle. The double negative still stands, of course, but without the word 'Juwes', it seems a little less perplexing.
Best regards,
Nick |
Author: ChrisGeorge
Tuesday, 04 January 2000 - 03:32 am | |
Hi, all:
In the anonymously written article that D'Onston wrote for the Pall Mall Gazette of December 1, 1888, in which he propounded the theory that the murderer was a French black magician who needed the uterus of a harlot for his black magic rituals, he shows the word "Juwes" in script. As David Radka stated, D'Onston pointed out that the word could actually have been the French "Juives" except that the police missed the dot over the "i" in shining their lanterns on the graffito. Mind you, although I assume the script form shown was meant to duplicate how the graffito was actually written, D'Onston thought that the words were chalked on the wall in Mitre Square above the body of the murder victim, Catherine Eddowes, not were they were actually found in the archway to Wentworth Model Dwellings in Goulston Street some distance away.
Chris George |
Author: RLeen
Tuesday, 04 January 2000 - 04:16 am | |
Hello Everybody,
For what it's worth I think the writer of the graffiti used French chalk as his writing implement. As you may know this chalk, widely used by tailors, dressmakers and the ilk, has a thin edge and is thus fairly far removed from the typical chalk stub as used by teachers etc. Use of this scribe would allow script to be written on the brick doorway.
Thanking you for your consideration.
Rabbi Leen |
Author: Bob Hinton
Tuesday, 04 January 2000 - 02:08 pm | |
Dear Rabbi,
I believe what you are referring to is tailors chalk which is a comparatively thin trangular wafer which has the edges sharpened like the blades of a knife. This shape enables you to select a fresh, sharp edge whenever the one you are using goes blunt. It was the only type of chalk that I tried (stick, lump and tailors) that I was able to write the relevant words with.
I believe French chalk is a very hard mineral used to rub over a inner tube repair to prevent it sticking to the tyre on a bicycle.
all the best
Bob Hinton |
Author: D. Radka
Tuesday, 04 January 2000 - 11:45 pm | |
C-M,
Hope your cold is better. I apologize for owing you an e-mail for so long--business picks up considerably this time of year.
David |
Author: ChrisGeorge
Thursday, 06 January 2000 - 11:05 pm | |
Hi all:
Rabbi Leen stated that he believed the chalk used to write the graffito was tailor's chalk, which "has a thin edge and is thus fairly far removed from the typical chalk stub as used by teachers etc. Use of this scribe would allow script to be written on the brick doorway."
Bob Hinton added that "tailors chalk . . . is a comparatively thin trangular wafer which has the edges sharpened like the blades of a knife. This shape enables you to select a fresh, sharp edge whenever the one you are using goes blunt. It was the only type of chalk that I tried (stick, lump and tailors) that I was able to write the relevant words with."
Both Bob and Rabbi Leen may be absolutely correct that it was this type of chalk used to write the graffito. But I would like to point out that the writing was, I believe, not done actually on plain brick but on painted brick. This makes it much more feasible that ordinary chalk could have been used, although you may be right that the size of the lettering (letters no higher than three quarters of an inch) implies that thin chalk would have been used.
We can see that the brickwork must have been painted by the descriptions of Detective Daniel Halse at the inquest on Catherine Eddowes as reported in the Daily Telegraph, 12 November 1888:
"It was written with white chalk on a black facia. . . . There were three lines of writing in a good schoolboy’s round hand. The size of the capital letters would be about 3/4 in, and the other letters were in proportion. The writing was on the black bricks, which formed a kind of dado, the bricks above being white."
Chris George |
Author: Bob Hinton
Friday, 07 January 2000 - 03:28 am | |
Dear Chris,
Yes you are quite correct it was done on painted brick, I found the only type of painted brick that would take chalk was painted with a matt paint.
The point about the type of chalk is that ordinairy stick chalk becomes blunt very quickly and thus makes the smaller letters indecipherable.
all the best
Bob Hinton |
Author: Leanne
Friday, 07 January 2000 - 06:42 am | |
G'day Chris and Bob,
Look at the photograph of the doorway, before it was altered,(posted by Stewart P. Evans), on the other Goulston Street board. You will see that if the writing was on the black bricks, it couldn't have been below the white bricks. Seeing this photo, one can imagine how small the message must have been.
In the book 'The Many Faces Of - - -', There is also a pre-1970s photograph of the doorway. Underneath it says: "On the wall facing us...'. So unless the words were written vertically (no mention of this), Bruce Paley was correct, when he described the size of the writing as that of a 'human hand' in width.
I still don't believe that 'Jack' would have crouched in a risky spot. Remember the streets were already filling with people.
LEANNE! |
Author: Boris
Friday, 07 January 2000 - 06:10 pm | |
Leanne is the Woman
Who will Not
be fooled by Nothing. |
Author: Jon
Friday, 07 January 2000 - 07:06 pm | |
Leanne
The writing was on the black bricks, at the top of the archway is white stone, the writing was below the white stone.
What do you mean "It couldnt have been below the white bricks" ?
Courtesy of Stewart Evans
Regards, Jon |
Author: D. Radka
Friday, 07 January 2000 - 11:34 pm | |
Maybe he write the graffito on Goulston Street to give us all a clue. Maybe he was in fact trying to obtain anatomical specimens of the uterus in order to sell them to the medical profession. In this case he'd be a bit of a ghoul--get it? Goulston Street? Ghouls were employed for many years by hospitals to dig up dead bodies buried in cemetaries, so that the medical profession could have its start.
A point to ponder.
David |
Author: Boris
Saturday, 08 January 2000 - 01:04 am | |
| Post removed due to inappropriate content. -SPR |
Author: anon
Saturday, 08 January 2000 - 01:34 am | |
| I'd like to meet you face to face Boris, you are all wind and piss. |
Author: Bob Hinton
Saturday, 08 January 2000 - 06:30 am | |
Dear Everyone,
This Boris fellow seems quite a dreary chappy doesn't he?
I believe I posted elsewhere about the difficulty the truly uneducated have with communication, both written and verbal, their attempts degenerating into a stream of nonsense and obscenities. If you refer to the above posting by Boris you will see exactly what I mean.
all the best
Bob Hinton |
Author: Jon
Saturday, 08 January 2000 - 11:34 am | |
David
This is assuming your remark was serious...
We are not sure about your suggestion of goulish activity. I posted a long (several pages) dissertation, The Doctor, the Deal & the Devil, on the old message board which raised questions along the same lines as you just posted.
But grave-robbing pretty well died out before 1850, I believe a change in the law is what caused that.
At one time it was only the bodies of convicts that could be used for research, this narrow avenue of supply promoted the the Bodysnatchers trade.
But following Burke & Hare the law was changed (1830's?) to allow the workhouse managers to sign over body's to medical colleges, slowly more bodies became available through legal means, and the practice pretty well died out.
I was hoping it was still alive by 1888, because I felt the uterus was Jack's target, but I have been unable to find evidence of Bodysnatching or even organ snatching, at this late period.
Regards, Jon |
Author: ChrisGeorge
Saturday, 08 January 2000 - 12:12 pm | |
Hi, Jon:
I think we are being misled by talking about the paintwork of the doorway as it was in 1888 and then showing a later photograph which does not show the brickwork painted the same way. Quite obviously, the photograph you are showing shows brickwork inside the archway painted white from top to bottom and the archway itself painted black from top to bottom. Detective Halse's statement stated that the brickwork at bottom was black and the brickwork at top white, so we are possibly looking for a dividing line halfway up the wall and archway which no longer existed by the time the photograph was taken. In 1888, the lower bricks were painted black in a "dado" painted a dark color in order to not show the dirt.
Chris George |
Author: Jon
Saturday, 08 January 2000 - 05:23 pm | |
Absolutly Chris, no question about that, but I am not clear about Leanne's point when refering to that photograph.
The Archway must have been repainted numerous times in the 112 yrs since it happened.
But the graffiti was on the archway, not inside on the wall. I fail to see the point of the argument.
Regards, Jon |
Author: Diana
Saturday, 08 January 2000 - 06:16 pm | |
| But doesn't it mean that if the lower bricks only were black, then the graffito was written on the lower half of the wall? This would have slowed JTR down. |
Author: Jon
Saturday, 08 January 2000 - 07:32 pm | |
What it means Diana, is that the wall was composite, of two colours (probably) and the dividing line may have been at waist height, chest height or shoulder height.
We can only speculate, I would guess shoulder height as anything higher would not mark the wall as it is out of 'common contact zone'. So lower than shoulder height would be a darker colour, very old public toilets used to be of similar decor.
Regards, Jon |
Author: Boris
Sunday, 09 January 2000 - 12:13 am | |
Dear Bob Hinton: Boris is not an uneducated chap. Mind you, he's very smart, street wise. He has a M.S. Degree in Chemical Engineering and a B.S. degree in English Literature from a well-accredited American University. He's also middle-aged, not an adolescent, uneducated idiot as you probably imagined. As alluded to in a previous post, your reasoning in this murder mystery amounts to counterfeit reasoning because you are unable to assess the true persona of the murderers.
Remainder of post removed due to inappropriate content -SPR |
