Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Artizan Dwellings writing photograph

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

  • David Orsam
    replied
    Originally posted by Pierre View Post
    Hi Monty,

    The reliability I speak of is the reliability of the source. The provenience is not known. That is a problem.

    And at the same time one must consider, when there is a handwriting match as in this case, what the reason for the match is.
    Pierre,

    You are, bizarrely, replying to a post made by Monty on 13 November 2015 (#86) which you replied to on the very same day (#98). You said back then:

    "there is no "source itself", there is only our interpretations of it."

    Now you are saying that there is a source itself and you were speaking of the reliability of it.

    To say I'm confused is a bit of an understatement.

    Leave a comment:


  • Pierre
    replied
    Originally posted by Monty View Post
    I assume by reliability you are referring to the connection to your suspect, not the source itself.

    Monty
    Hi Monty,

    The reliability I speak of is the reliability of the source. The provenience is not known. That is a problem.

    And at the same time one must consider, when there is a handwriting match as in this case, what the reason for the match is.

    Leave a comment:


  • Pierre
    replied
    The handwriting match

    But right now I am most interested in the handwriting match I happened to get here.

    Most of the letters look so common in their style that I canīt say that the validity of an interpretation that he wrote them would be very high. Even though they are similar.

    But some letters that are written in a more unusual style are a perfect match.

    Pierre

    Leave a comment:


  • Pierre
    replied
    Originally posted by Monty View Post
    Can you please clarify that?

    Cheers

    Monty
    Yes. When you have a historical source and you want to know something about it you depend on internal and external source criticism among other things.

    So the source "in itself" has nothing to say.

    You could read a little about it here if you are interested:

    http://www2.bc.edu/~rappleb/HistororicalResearch.html

    Regards Pierre
    Last edited by Pierre; 11-14-2015, 12:35 AM.

    Leave a comment:


  • GUT
    replied
    Wow some strange going on here.

    Bully boy (as Cristned me EnaEm)

    Leave a comment:


  • DJA
    replied
    Originally posted by Rosella View Post
    After all, the Ripper probably didn't have one (a degree, I mean.)
    He had more than one.

    Leave a comment:


  • Rosella
    replied
    Gosh, there seems to have been an awful lot of snarling going on in this and other threads lately. Must be the Christmas season coming on!

    Also, the question about posters having university degrees has raised its ugly head on the forum, as well. Does it really matter whether a person has a degree or not so long as they are prepared to discuss Jack here in a sensible and cordial way? After all, the Ripper probably didn't have one (a degree, I mean.)

    Leave a comment:


  • Scott Nelson
    replied
    Artians Dwellings right centre.
    Attached Files

    Leave a comment:


  • DJA
    replied
    Originally posted by Monty View Post
    Hello all,

    With thanks to Stephen Ryder, our article entitled The Victims Photographs and some Wall Writing, which appeared in Ripperologist Issue 127 is now available on the Dissertations page for your reading.

    http://casebook.org/dissertations/rip-wallwriting.html


    With that, we leave you with THE photo of the Artizan Dwellings wall writing.

    Regards

    Neil & Rob
    The central buildings are gone,however the North and South ones remain.

    Artizan Street today is home to the Artizan Street Library.

    Always wondered about these stupid spell checkers.
    Dawned on me prolly the work of some demented AM.
    Meh,whatever keeps 'em off the dole.

    Leave a comment:


  • MrBarnett
    replied
    I bet the Jones's were furious when they received that letter.

    'How dare 'e call our kids annoyin'? The snooty bugger can't even spell artisans!'

    Leave a comment:


  • Monty
    replied
    Originally posted by EmaEm View Post
    Yes, always tells me. I did not notice you standing beside me when this has happened, yet you know better. You get more ludicrous, childish and boring by each post and I will not be replying to any more of them as I have better things to do with my time.You have, of course, made a Royal show of yourself and obviously have time on your hands to play childish games. I do not. Now, if you had shown an ounce of wit, that might have been different.
    Still amused.

    I can understand your retreat. Being proven wrong is not easy to take. Add on to that the embarrassment of having ones proverbial ass kicked by someone who aint done much book learning or owt, I don't blame you for running and hiding.

    Monty

    Leave a comment:


  • David Orsam
    replied
    I say: keep 'em coming!

    Leave a comment:


  • MrBarnett
    replied
    I know the controversy's over, but this just had to see the light of day.

    Click image for larger version

Name:	image.jpg
Views:	1
Size:	102.4 KB
ID:	666342
    Last edited by MrBarnett; 11-13-2015, 02:20 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • jmenges
    replied
    I would say:

    Big Rough Ripper Boys =1 / Batshit Crazy Person =0

    But I stopped keeping score years ago.


    JM

    Leave a comment:


  • David Orsam
    replied
    For anyone still interested, I checked the actual statutes. There was no relevant legislation in 1887. There was, however, an 1868 Act called 'An Act to provide better Dwellings for Artizans and Labourers'; an 1875 Act, 'The Artizans and Labourers Dwellings Improvement Act'; an 1879 Act with the same title; an 1882 Act, 'The Artizans Dwellings Act', and an 1885 Act which amended the Artizans and Labourers Dwellings Improvement Acts - images for all of which I could provide if necessary - but I restrict myself to simply posting an image from the Housing of the Working Classes Act of 1890, of which the long title was 'An Act to consolidate and amend the Acts relating to Artizans and Labourers Dwellings and the Housing of the Working Classes'.

    I don't know why I bothered because the excerpt I posted yesterday from the Times newspaper of 1891 should have been sufficient to dispose of this point.
    Attached Files

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X