Eddowes Apron Style - Confused

[BooksbyBJThompson]

Hi All ,

Rumbelow writes in The Complete, "...apron that was around her neck had been cut away."

I cannot picture this - around her neck?

Could anyone explain this apron style to me.
Thanks.

[bonestrewn]

Hi BJ!

Could he have meant that her apron had a strap that went around the neck, the way a modern cook's apron does?

[Tani]

Something like this is probably meant,

[BooksbyBJThompson]

Hi, thanks to you both for your much valued help.

Rumbelow writes it's THIS top area the Ripper sliced off, not the shirt end.

I can't visualize this if it's a bodus bib we're talking he cut away.

[Tani]

Hi, thanks to you both for your much valued help.

Rumbelow writes it's THIS top area the Ripper sliced off, not the shirt end.

I can't visualize this if it's a bodus bib we're talking he cut away.

Sadly old Donald is not always quite accurate. If it is the top part of an apron it would only make sense for it, at least to me, for it to be the bib portion. It's all I can imagine.

Could be something like this on the round-the-neck portion?

[BooksbyBJThompson]

Hi Tani ,

Maybe, yes. Sadly, Donald's book doesn't give enough details but neither the Source book either on their documents on Eddowes.

Did Jack knife it away, initially, to get at her chest?
And he decided afterwards to use it as a cleaning cloth?

I wish I could visualize this better.
Before reading this, I assumed a piece had been ripped off the apron's lower skirt area.

Assuming is truly not healthy. Lol...

[C. F. Leon]

Tom Wescott may be able to help you. He refers to the apron often, especially in connection to the GSG, although he seems to believe that the apron was tied ONLY at the waist.
I don't know the situation in LV London, but in my cooking career, I used half-aprons, which tie at the waist, or full aprons, which either tie at BOTH the waist and neck (although often just an over-the-neck loop without loose ends to tie) or had sleeves (and then often tied at the waist). If you are talking about over-the-neck, then you are usually referring to bibs, which don't tie at the waist (but may have sleeves). And then you have coveralls, which are usually specialty industrial/recreational use (rather than cooking), which actually have legs and sleeves, so ties usually aren't necessary.

[Tani]

Maybe the word 'apron' was being used here somewhat loosely?

[BooksbyBJThompson]

C.F. Leon and Tani, how do you two read this? pic attached

[BooksbyBJThompson]

And this passage is from the Jack the Ripper Sourcebook pic attached

[BooksbyBJThompson]

The piece has to be around the neck, NOT from the lower skirt portion of a 19th century apron. But for the life of me, I can't visualize what it is Jack cut off???

[C. F. Leon]

I probably should also mention bib-aprons, which are more complicated- partially because some people use the term as just another name for the full aprons. Properly, though, they are fancier, more ornate. They may vary from just a fancy full apron with frills or such to a 2-piece thing with a bib that fits over a more-or-less standard full apron. Because they are more fancy (expensive), they are rarely, if ever, used in cooking (although perhaps on the visible servers at the high-class affairs) or industrial. They are the ones that you often see on nurses or nannies. They are two-piece because you may have to deal with the baby's spit-up or whatever from the patient. So you have the bib piece that you can launder by itself with the skirt piece that you can re-wear for the rest of the week or so.

I very much doubt Eddowes was wearing a bib-apron. Frankly, I had the impression that she was wearing a half apron, tied at the waist, until I saw these reports about it being around the neck.

[BooksbyBJThompson]

Yeah, me, too, CF. This is why I stopped cold and to rethink this scenario.
Yes, I do know of those types if fancy aprons, but I always that the top was sewn to the bottom.
Obviously, I got that wrong, too.

And I agree with you re: Catherine owning such a fancy piece.

If the plain ones were simply tied on with strings, I guess Jack just knifed through those strings to get at her top clothing???

Geez, I wish I could get a handle on this visual.

Why would a mere apron hinder Jack?
Why not knife right through it and the clothing???

[c.d.]

I'm having trouble understanding the significance of this.

What if she took it off in order to kneel on so that it is already off when he begins his attack?

c.d.

[BooksbyBJThompson]

I'm having trouble understanding the significance of this.

What if she took it off in order to kneel on so that it is already off when he begins his attack?

c.d.

Hi c.d.,

Tom Westcott told me one of the strings of that top apron was still around her neck.

So, she hadn't removed it before the attack.