Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Was Catherine Eddowes Menstruating?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • I think it may have been mentioned before on the forum that the weather was wet during the spring and through to mid summer but dry during August, IIRC it was on the 'hopping' thread. So it seems reasonable to assume that she got her tan when she went to Kent. A deep tan was not fashionable in the LVP among the middle and upper classes, as many of the working classes worked in the open in all weathers and were more likely to acquire a tan it was regarded as an indication of class.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by Phil Carter View Post
      Chris,

      A question.

      How, in your opinion, would it be possible for Eddowes to walk the distance she walked in one day BACK to London, given the state of her health? I mean, malnourished bodies lack energy. It takes a fair bit of energy to walk that distance in one day, no?

      Phil
      Phil, did they definitely do it in one day? I got the impression it was three days
      and that is the time they went hungry, not having any money on them. I haven't as source for this though, just an idea something I picked up from one newspapers. Is that wrong?

      Comment


      • Originally posted by Paul View Post
        [FONT=Arial][SIZE=3]Chintz skirt, jagged cut 6 1/2 inches long from waistband, left side of front...Blood on bottom, back and front of skirt.

        Brown linsey dress bodice, clean cut bottom of left side, 5 inches long from right to left.

        Grey stuff petticoat, white waist band, cut 1 1/2 inches long, thereon in front. Edges blood stained
        . Blood stains on front at bottom of petticoat.

        Green alpaca skirt, jagged cut 10 1/2 inches long in front of waistband downward, blood stained inside, front under cut.

        Blue skirt, jagged cut 10 1/2 inches long through waistband, downward, blood stained, inside and outside back and front.


        Dr Brown stated that "There was no blood on the front of the clothes."

        The extant inquest report states:

        .
        I'm still trying to make sense of these cuts. Presumably for Trevor to suggest that there were two cuts through the clothing into the body (I trust that is what he is saying) then presumably he's suggesting that as the clothing was layered then some of the cuts were caused at the same time?

        There might be some sense in that.. The two 10.5 inch cuts and 1.5 inch, could well be the same knife stroke.. Its very difficult to imagine this in the 360..

        But if these cuts did penetrate the body then its hard to imagine no blood on the front of the body?

        I think possibly we are looking at three seperate knife stokes.. Rather reminicent of the Tabram attack in my mind..

        Yours Jeff

        Comment


        • Originally posted by Debra Arif View Post
          Phil, did they definitely do it in one day? I got the impression it was three days
          and that is the time they went hungry, not having any money on them. I haven't as source for this though, just an idea something I picked up from one newspapers. Is that wrong?
          Hello Debs,

          Fair comment.
          From what I can recall, it was done in one day. Even so Debs, IF we are talking malnourished.. and the body of Kate Eddowes didn't SUDDENLY become malnourished over a few days.. it would take time to get into the state it was in... it's one heck of a lot of energy to use in 3 days. 1/3 days.. I could be wrong here...but even so...With all those clothes on.. and she was fairly packed with clothes.. new boots? Just seems pretty incredible to me.. but then again.. maybe it was nice weather and the roads were pleasant to walk on, not too stoney...maybe she rested up a dozen times... but would still need to get the nourishment for the energy needed to walk that distance.

          Heck..I'm no nutrition expert... maybe someone around here is?

          Phil
          from 1905...to 19.05..it was written in the stars

          Comment


          • Originally posted by Jeff Leahy View Post
            But if these cuts did penetrate the body then its hard to imagine no blood on the front of the body?

            Yours Jeff

            If the cuts were struck postmortem, there would not be gobs of blood.
            SPERO IN DEO

            Comment


            • Originally posted by Phil Carter View Post
              Hello Debs,

              Just seems pretty incredible to me.. but then again.. maybe it was nice weather and the roads were pleasant to walk on, not too stoney...maybe she rested up a dozen times... but would still need to get the nourishment for the energy needed to walk that distance.

              Heck..I'm no nutrition expert... maybe someone around here is?

              Phil
              I've got a call into one.....

              I gotta say that I think the lower classes in the LVP were tough as nails and did what they had to do to survive. What was the alternative?

              OK then back to venereal disease, an occupational hazard for a prostitute. I think it is safe to say that all of the C5 had various infections at various times, all of which have implications for fertility and menstruation.

              I'm poking around for statistics and am striking out at the moment.

              Here's a clip from
              Health, Medicine, and Society in Victorian England

              By Mary Wilson Carpenter
              Attached Files

              Comment


              • and from

                Prostitution and Victorian Society: Women, Class, and the State

                By Judith R. Walkowitz

                I hope we can discuss all these matters without rancor. I am not laying claim to expertise in female health matters; I'm just trying to puzzle out what the state of Eddowes' health was in 1888 and perhaps shed some light on the Lusk letter. I am not saying Eddowes had syphilis - I'm just looking at V.D. in general.

                Attached Files

                Comment


                • Originally posted by Whitechurch View Post
                  If the cuts were struck postmortem, there would not be gobs of blood.
                  Yes thats clearly the difference with Tabram here..

                  There does appear a certain amount of blood. I guess its almost impossible to estimate where and when it contacted the clothing..

                  Trevor appears to be suggesting that there should be blood on the apron if she was wearing it?

                  I'm not so certain that is the case. For a start it would be protected by the layers of clothes above it..and we dont know the cuts to clothing penetrated into the body and of cause we know a few blood drops did end up on the apron..

                  And while I accept Dr Brown did a good job its still impossible to be precise without detailed photographs of what he is describing..

                  The key piont of discussion here is could the known knife cuts and blood splatter eliminate Kate from having worn the apron..

                  As Trevor pointed out there are a number of issues inter-linked with the argument currently raging about kates menstral ability..

                  Yours Jeff

                  PS I didnt ignore your post Debs, just didnt have anything to add.. My experience, wearing hot bioler suits is that you can tan through light clothing and material in strong salt wind.. But I accept I don't know the physics .

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by SirRobertAnderson View Post
                    I have a hard time envisioning Eddowes' as the picture of health. It's an important point.
                    Please don't misquote me.

                    I never said she was the picture of health, I argued she was
                    healthier than you've made her out to be as evidenced
                    by her work in the hop fields (now refuted) and the walk
                    back from Hunton to Whitechapel.

                    If Dr Brown had meant a yellow skin tone, wouldn't he have
                    been more likely to use the term "jaundice" rather than
                    bronzed?

                    If Eddowes had Bright's disease, where's the edema?

                    From the same wiki page quoted earlier:

                    The symptoms are usually severe. Back pain...elevated
                    blood pressure, vomiting and fever commonly signal an
                    attack. Edema, varying in degree from slight puffiness
                    of the face to an accumulation of fluid sufficient to
                    distend the whole body, and sometimes severely
                    restricted breathing, is very common.

                    As anyone who has suffered any sort of kidney ailment
                    will tell you, the back pain is excruciating. To suggest
                    that anyone with a chronic kidney ailment such as
                    Bright's could walk 37 miles is unreasonable in my
                    opinion.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by Livia Trivia View Post
                      Please don't misquote me.
                      I am not quoting you Livia. You didn't say that. Nor am I implying you have it in mind. And I am not playing semantic games.

                      I am saying 'I have a hard time envisioning Eddowes' as the picture of health. It's an important point'.

                      Venereal disease was rife I believe amongst the class of prostitutes Eddowes belonged to.After 8 years in the life I think she'd have had a history of it.I posted two references I found and a request for hard data if someone has it.

                      Originally posted by Livia Trivia View Post

                      If Eddowes had Bright's disease, where's the edema?
                      The post mortem photos are obviously imperfect for examination but I thought the folds on the abdomen interesting from that viewpoint. It's the only area that isn't lean. I had a brother in law with severe kidney disease and he was skin and bones except for his belly area.

                      I thought of showing the photos to Dr. S. yesterday but thought it might be pushing it at the time. I can ask him when I see him for a Board meeting in a month.

                      And as far as pain goes - we know Eddowes was self medicating with alcohol.

                      Comment


                      • http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bright's_disease

                        Just incase anyone hasnt checked this...

                        It seems to support what both Livia and Robert are saying

                        I'd just add that John Kelly doesn't mention anything about Kate being in pain?

                        Jeff

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by Monty View Post
                          A couple of points as I am pushed for time.

                          1) PC Robinson DID state Eddowes had an apron

                          2) Women were usually commandeered from the section house where they would be working as a Cook or Housekeeper in the Section House. In the case of Bishopsgate it could be possible that a Matron or nurse could be used from the adjoining Police hospital.

                          3) However not all stations had a females in them so they had no choice to use males.

                          4) As we have no female witnesses regarding Eddowes stay in Bishopsgate we must draw 2 conclusions. 1 the Coroner did not deem their input as relevant or 2, there were no female attendants at Bishopsgate police station.

                          As Byfield nor Hutt refers to a female, in my opinion it is most likely there were no female attendants to see to Eddowes.

                          I have rates of pay for these ladies, I have to have a look see and, honestly speaking, I am a bit snowed under so may take some time.

                          Monty


                          PS more than a couple, I know. Apologies.
                          Off topic, sorry

                          I said Id find it.

                          This is taken from City of London Order Book for Bishopsgate. It doesnt cover the period of 1888 (this order is dated 1891) however is shows the rate of pay for a female matron to watch a female prisoner if required.



                          Monty
                          Attached Files

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by Debra Arif View Post
                            Phil, did they definitely do it in one day? I got the impression it was three days
                            and that is the time they went hungry, not having any money on them. I haven't as source for this though, just an idea something I picked up from one newspapers. Is that wrong?
                            Hi Debs,
                            It is possible you might be misremembering Kelly's statement as reported by the police: "On the previous Monday night they slept in Kent, where they were hopping. They came up from Kent on Thursday, he believed..." It's in The Ultimate (which I am delighted to see is available for the Kindle!).

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by Monty View Post
                              Off topic, sorry

                              I said Id find it.

                              This is taken from City of London Order Book for Bishopsgate. It doesnt cover the period of 1888 (this order is dated 1891) however is shows the rate of pay for a female matron to watch a female prisoner if required.



                              Monty
                              Thanks! And of course it's on topic as ages ago we were discussing what might have happened if Eddowes came upon her period while in jail. And the presence of female matrons TO MY MIND makes it even less likely she'd have cut her apron, ASSuming they'd have taken her rags away in the first place.

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by Phil Carter View Post
                                Hello Debs,

                                Fair comment.
                                From what I can recall, it was done in one day. Even so Debs, IF we are talking malnourished.. and the body of Kate Eddowes didn't SUDDENLY become malnourished over a few days.. it would take time to get into the state it was in... it's one heck of a lot of energy to use in 3 days. 1/3 days.. I could be wrong here...but even so...With all those clothes on.. and she was fairly packed with clothes.. new boots? Just seems pretty incredible to me.. but then again.. maybe it was nice weather and the roads were pleasant to walk on, not too stoney...maybe she rested up a dozen times... but would still need to get the nourishment for the energy needed to walk that distance.

                                Heck..I'm no nutrition expert... maybe someone around here is?

                                Phil
                                I will have a look and see if I can find the paper I think I saw it in.
                                One thing I would ask, are we presuming the severe malnutrition and emaciation were a result of lack of food? If so was John Kelly affected the same? He managed to do a physical job as a labourer,albeit on a casual basis, and he walked to Kent and back alongside Catherine. His hospital records show him begin admitted for things like tonsillitis and bronchitis but nothing much else. He eventually died in 1890 from dropsy.*
                                When Eddowes was admitted to the Whitechapel Infirmary in 1887 it was for a burnt foot, wouldn't they have picked up on a kidney problem or sever malnutrition or VD then and maybe kept her in longer? I don't know that any other records exist for Catherine in the Whitechapel Infirmary either, although John went quite regularly.

                                Jeff-no worrries-you're safe, I'm not menopausal and ripping off heads just yet. LOL
                                Paul- that's okay. I am very easily confused, sorry.

                                * If my identification of him in 1890 is correct

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X