Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The A To Z 2010 : Discussion Thread 2

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

  • The A To Z 2010 : Discussion Thread 2

    For those fortunate enough to have a copy of this essential book, this thread is for discussing an entry...any entry...you care to bring to the fore.
    To Join JTR Forums :
    Contact [email protected]

  • #2
    Mrs. Long

    Originally posted by How Brown View Post
    For those fortunate enough to have a copy of this essential book, this thread is for discussing an entry...any entry...you care to bring to the fore.
    I'm not wishing to nit-pick but an important witness such as Mrs Elizabeth Long does require special attention.

    It surprised me to see that there are two entries on her in the book. The first is under 'DARRELL or DURRELL, MRS' (Page 130) and the second is 'LONG, MRS ELIZABETH' (Page 306). In the first entry it is noted 'A note on police files calls her the woman 'Darrell or Long' (HO144/221/A49301C f.136).'

    The second entry states 'It is not known why the police and some newspapers knew her by another name.'

    On page 233 there appears a table of witnesses and descriptions given of suspects. In the age column for Mrs. Long's suspect it states 'Around 40'.

    In the police reports she primarily appears as 'Mrs. Long' and the description she gave of the suspect clearly states 'apparently over 40 years of age' (folio 140 - see below). Also folio 136 (the police file contents list), as quoted above clearly states 'Long Mrs. alias Durrell' (see below).

    I quote this just to set the record straight.


    Comment


    • #3
      'Alfred Aylmer'

      There is an entry on page 36 of the new A to Z - AYLMER, ALFRED. It will be remembered that an article under this pseudonym appeared in the Windsor Magazine in May 1895. In this article 'Aylmer' writes about Anderson (inter alia) and refers to Anderson's 'perfectly plausible theory' that Jack the Ripper had been committed to an asylum.

      Many years ago I identified 'Alfred Aylmer' as Major Arthur Griffiths writing under a pseudonym. This was a common device for authors of articles in 19th century, early 20th century, magazines, and they often wrote articles under their correct name at the same time. Authors of crime related articles which were serialised often went on to publish books that were comprised of their articles. Reading this article, 'The Detective in Real Life' (first discovered by Melvin Harris), it seemed to me, from the style and content, to be obviously written by Griffiths.

      In this entry in the A to Z the authors appear to cast doubt on the identification of Aylmer with Griffiths referring to The Man Who Hunted Jack the Ripper as being the published vehicle for this identification. They refer to Griffiths' 1896 article in Cassell's Family Magazine (first discovered by Nick Connell) and the fact that articles by both 'Aylmer' and Griffiths were being carried in the Windsor Magazine to be indicators that there was some doubt that 'Aylmer' was, in fact, Griffiths.

      Analysis of the content of 'The Detective in Real Life' and Griffiths' 1898 book Mysteries of Police and Crime show conclusively, in my opinion, that Griffiths was the writer of both. See the comparisons of the relevant text of both, shown below for the benefit of readers.




      Comment


      • #4
        The Swanson Marginalia

        On page 503 of the new A to Z our old favourite 'The Swanson Marginalia' is discussed. On this page the authors list 'historical problems' that the 'marginalia' poses. No. 4 on this list is "The claim that the suspect was taken by the Metropolitan Police 'with difficulty' for identification."

        What Swanson actually wrote in the endpaper notes is "...where he [the suspect] had been sent by us with difficulty...".

        Now, in my opinion, there is a difference between the words 'sent' and 'taken' and for the sake of accuracy the actual word used should be adhered to.

        Comment


        • #5
          Dr Killeen

          The entry on Dr Killeen (page 263) states, re- Martha Tabram, "He estimated death had occurred about two hours previously."

          The reported inquest testimony of Dr Killeen actually states "She had been dead some three hours." See below scan from The Times report of August 10, 1888 (Page 12) which appears as HO 144/221/A49301C folio 3 in the official files. Other reports also give three hours. The doctor's estimate of time of death is very important (albeit debatable as to how accurate these were) in trying to ascertain the actual time of the murder.

          Comment


          • #6
            Anderson

            On page 23, in the Anderson entry, it is stated, "Anderson accordingly left for Switzerland on 8 September, the day after Mary Ann Nichols was murdered..." [Authors' emphasis]

            It was, of course, the Chapman murder, not Nichols, and Anderson actually left on Friday 7 September, the day before the Chapman murder, which was committed on the morning of Saturday 8 September, 1888. This is clear from what he writes in The Lighter Side of My Official Life (page 135 see below) which states, "...and the third [murder] occurred the night of the day on which I left London." The murder occurred on the Friday night, albeit in the early hours of the Saturday morning.

            Comment


            • #7
              Thanks very much SPE for taking the horn by the bulls and bringing these matter for discussion to the fore. If and when Ripperologists do bring the various minor gaffes up, I hope people don't get the impression that its nitpicking as you mentioned before. Its beneficial...and besides,Mr. Begg has skin like a rhino. A biker rhino. A Hells Angels biker rhino.
              Because if these entries aren't brought to the fore, commentators from the civilian world might be found saying there's an absence of studiousness in the field. Ripperology has a hell of a lot of scrutinizing individuals working day in and day out on the boards.

              As you succintly stated on the other A to Z thread,Mr Evans...it is an essential work and that its extremely difficult to get everything down without a miscue here and there.
              To Join JTR Forums :
              Contact [email protected]

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by How Brown View Post
                Thanks very much SPE for taking the horn by the bulls and bringing these matter for discussion to the fore. If and when Ripperologists do bring the various minor gaffes up, I hope people don't get the impression that its nitpicking as you mentioned before. Its beneficial...and besides,Mr. Begg has skin like a rhino. A biker rhino. A Hells Angels biker rhino.
                Because if these entries aren't brought to the fore, commentators from the civilian world might be found saying there's an absence of studiousness in the field. Ripperology has a hell of a lot of scrutinizing individuals working day in and day out on the boards.

                As you succintly stated on the other A to Z thread,Mr Evans...it is an essential work and that its extremely difficult to get everything down without a miscue here and there.
                Hello Howard,

                I agree with all of this. I'd rather see so called "nit-picking" than a "comb-over". Being historical, new discoveries will change history. It is important to place the history that is factually known correctly before the general public. And if one doesn't suceed at first, a paperback follow-up is the ideal answer. Nothing, and nobody, is perfect. Everyone accepts that things will be missed. One word, as has been pointed out, can change much. I am very pleased to see the general direction of the book has changed since 1996.

                In my opinion, whomever composes a book of this magnitude, justify immense respect. This mammoth historical effort, with all the "problems" that could be connected with it, with all the long and arduous hours used, the going over each and every point again and again, cross referencing seemingly in perpetuity, and still miss the odd error is indeed infuriating, yet anyone who has ever written a book will know that this is always the case. Most authors do indeed accept such irregularities being pointed out afterwards. It does not and should not detract from the overall presentation and effort having been put in over a very long time.
                I thank the three authors for their immense efforts in a very difficult field filled with minutae. Likewise I thank people such as SPE for pointing out what others have missed. It is indeed beneficial to us all, and future generations of researchers and historians.

                best wishes

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

                Comment


                • #9
                  Lydia Hart

                  Originally posted by How Brown View Post
                  Thanks very much SPE for taking the horn by the bulls and bringing these matter for discussion to the fore. If and when Ripperologists do bring the various minor gaffes up, I hope people don't get the impression that its nitpicking as you mentioned before. Its beneficial...and besides,Mr. Begg has skin like a rhino. A biker rhino. A Hells Angels biker rhino.
                  Because if these entries aren't brought to the fore, commentators from the civilian world might be found saying there's an absence of studiousness in the field. Ripperology has a hell of a lot of scrutinizing individuals working day in and day out on the boards.
                  As you succintly stated on the other A to Z thread,Mr Evans...it is an essential work and that its extremely difficult to get everything down without a miscue here and there.
                  Thank you for that How. I do hope that the information helps.

                  I have been very busy of late and I am not reading the new A to Z right through, but accessing it randomly on certain points of interest. May I say here and now that despite the to be expected errors (that appear in most books) it is an essential volume and I recommend everyone to purchase a copy. Here is another small point that I feel requires attention.

                  In the entry on 'HART, LYDIA' (rumoured Pinchin Street victim) it states, "The New York World, 11 September 1889, reported the woman's full name was Lydia Hart. The identification was never confirmed..." Thus Hart is left as a possible victim.

                  However, a report in in The New York Herald of September 11, 1889, (London edition) [MEPO 3/140 folio 135] clearly states that Lydia Hart's two sons, with others, went to the local infirmary and found her there, alive and well. She had been on 'bit of a spree' and had gone there 'to get medical treatment.' (See below)

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    PC Harvey

                    In the entry on 'HARVEY, PC JAMES, 964 CITY' (page 201) it states "He saw nothing then: subsequently responded to PC Watkins' whistle when Catherine Eddowes' body was found."

                    This would be a little difficult as Watkins did not carry a whistle. From the inquest testimony it is clear to see that Harvey responded to the whistle blown by the Kearley and Tonge night watchman George Morris. See below extracts from evidence of PC Watkins and PC Harvey given at the inquest.



                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Daniel Farson

                      In the entry on Daniel Farson, page 226, it is stated of Farson's 1972 book, "This was the first book to print the mortuary photographs of victims discovered by Francis Camps in the London Hospital." This is not correct.

                      The accreditation for the discovery of the said mortuary photographs, Eddowes (4) and Kelly (1) actually belongs to Donald Rumbelow of the City Police. Rumbelow had copies made of these photographs (and the exterior shot of Miller's Court) and gave a set to Camps who, much to Rumbelow's chagrin, provided Farson with copies for his book.

                      The photograph of Martha Turner (Tabram) used by Farson came from MEPO 3/140 Folio 33, and the sketch of 'Eddowes's head', used by Farson, was discovered by Sam Hardy (Camps' assistant) in the London Hospital.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        One very minor and insignificant statement is in regard to when ( and Mr. Begg should be tied down and forced to read Eliphaz Levi's Dogme Et Rituel for this one ) Ripperologist Magazine went to the current ezine format.
                        It was in December of 2005, not in 2006.
                        Of course, he'll pawn this one off to Mr. Fido.

                        Another possible bone of contention, as minor as the previous one, is the statement on page 515 that refers to The Daily Telegraph being the newspaper with the largest circulation in the world.
                        Lloyd's Weekly also makes the same boast, but I'll be damned if I can find out the year they made their boast. As I began to post this, I recalled seeing the year that Lloyd's referred to themselves as the world's largest in terms of circulation....but now I can't remember what year. Typical.

                        This is a terrific and very,very useful book just as Mr. Evans and Nemo have stated before.
                        To Join JTR Forums :
                        Contact [email protected]

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Its never good to post without a source to back it up on the Forums, so here is the reference to Lloyds' claim as the world's largest circulation, but without the year.
                          Dammit.

                          As therefore Lloyd's Newspaper confessedly had then as the largest circulation of any newspaper in the world -- its circulation being above 500,000 -- he offered to the proprietor of that journal to pay for his addresses as advertisements
                          -19th Century British Library Newspapers Archive
                          To Join JTR Forums :
                          Contact [email protected]

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Page 227 mentions Neal Shelden with the word psuedonym in parentheses after his name in this manner : (pseudonym).
                            ?

                            To Join JTR Forums :
                            Contact [email protected]

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Try

                              Originally posted by How Brown View Post
                              ...
                              One book which was not mentioned was Alan Sharp's Jack The Ripper & The Irish Press.
                              Try pages 305-306 How.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X