An experiment

[David Orsam]

with high probability misread word "Juwes"

Pierre, I need to tell you that there are two fundamental flaws in what you are proposing.

The first is that it would mean that everyone who saw the writing on the wall, including PC Long, Detective Halse, Sir Charles Warren and Superintendent Arnold, misread the key word as being Jews (or some form of variation of spelling of that word) when it was something else.

The second is that you have made a wholly random and arbitrary decision that the letters of "Ju" in the key word were correctly deciphered whereas it could easily be "Ju" that is completely wrong and only "wes" is correct, or perhaps every single letter has been wrongly recorded.

The irony of the situation, however, is that a misreading of "Juwes" would strongly support the masonic theory – namely that the word was "Jubes".

Jubes would make perfect sense because:

1. What you call the stem of the names of the three ruffians, Jubela, Jubelo and Jubeum is "Jube" so it would be natural for them collectively to be called "the Jubes".

2. Even if the writer on the wall had invented the name "Jubes" there would be little difficulty for anyone who was aware of masonic legends in understanding that the Jubes must be the three ruffians (in contrast to the word "Juwes" where there is obvious confusion).

3. There are obvious masonic elements to the mutilations performed by Jack the Ripper.

4. Other masonic connections involve triangular flaps on the face of Eddowes (with the triangle being a very important symbol in masonry) and her body being found in Mitre Square (a mitre being a mason's tool).

5. The three ruffians were men.

6. The three ruffians were blamed for the murder of Hiram Abiff.

7. Sir Charles Warren and Superintendent Arnold were masons so they might have noted that the word was Jubes but deliberately spread disinformation that it said "Juwes" to throw suspicion away from freemasons.

8. Long and Halse might have been enlisted in this conspiracy.

9. It would explain why Sir Charles Warren ordered the writing to be obliterated so that the connection to Jubes would never be made (until now).

10. It would also explain why Superintendent Arnold corroborated Sir Charles Warren's account of the erasure.

So, Pierre, unless you actually know of another English word that could have been misread for Juwes, and would make sense in context, I suggest we have reached the end of the line and there is no point in anyone searching the dictionary. Would you not agree?

[Sam Flynn]

1. What you call the stem of the names of the three ruffians, Jubela, Jubelo and Jubelum is "Jube" so it would be natural for them collectively to be called "the Jubes".

Isn't the stem actually "Jubel" (Jubela, Jubelo, Jubelum)? That's something that always irked me about the Stephen Knight theory - how come the ruffians became "Juwes" and not "Jubels"?

[David Orsam]

Isn't the stem actually "Jubel" (Jubela, Jubelo, Jubelum)?

I don't know if there are any actual linguistic rules but I'm assuming Pierre's 'stem' has to be one syllable, hence 'jube'.

[SirJohnFalstaff]

I believe, the word judges has been posited before.
In reference to the trial and execution of Israel Lipski.

The very first time I read about JtR was in a Reader's Digest book (I know, I know, not reliable)

BUT

They did talk about the possibility that it was the word "judges". So I believe this notion, from a book published in the 70's, is not new, and maybe taken from more reliable publication.

On a side note, the very short entry mentioned that Jack was probably killed by prostitutes seeking revenge and dumped in the Thames. I have no idea where they got that from.

[Mayerling]

If it was the name or word "Jube's, it might refer to those Confederate soldiers who served under General Jubal Early (nickname, "Old Jube") in the American Civil War.

Not that I particularly like stretching that far with this word.

Jeff

[Pierre]

[QUOTE=Elamarna;373190]Hi all

Know said I was out of this thread as far as debating and following the leads was based, but i am still reading. and just wanted to add a final few thoughts.
Harry D,
i see no reason for not accepting your reasoning above as being at least as good as any other interpretation.


My dear Pierre,

"Is there any word in the English dictionary that starts with the root Ju-, ends with the plural -es (since it refers to "the men") and has 1-2 letters (for w = v+v) in the middle for the, with high probability misread word "Juwes""

I am sure you have a word in mind and have done since the start of the thread,

You called it "An experiment", which implies testing of an idea with an end point, what we have is however a word game which with all due respect is not an experiment.

Hi Steve,

An historical experiment is made by trying different methods to achieve new knowledge. "Word games" are only played as a hobby or for fun. We aim at trying to understand a text that has been misunderstood for 128 years. It must be misunderstood, since we can´t understand it!

Your reasons for saying you do not have a word in mind are yours and so be it. I do not wishes to offend at all but that is how it comes across.

Steve, I am not the only one who can think here. There are a lot of thinking persons here with a lot of knowledge about the problems of the GSG. I bet their thinking outside of the box, with new methods (forgetting the "jews-" and using a dictionary) is better than mine.

A check of several dictionaries gives little that fits the task you are setting, and lets be honest, that’s what you are doing, I do understand.

There is one word that stands out, starts and ends as you say and has 2 letters in the middle, must admit not sure why "w" is seen by you as meaning 2 letters.

"The Germanic /w/ phoneme was therefore written as ⟨VV⟩ or ⟨uu⟩ (⟨u⟩ and ⟨v⟩ becoming distinct only by the Early Modern period) by the 7th or 8th century by the earliest writers of Old English and Old High German.[3] Gothic (not Latin-based), by contrast, simply used a letter based on the Greek Υ for the same sound. The digraph ⟨VV⟩/⟨uu⟩ was also used in Medieval Latin to represent Germanic names, including Gothic ones like Wamba.

It is from this ⟨uu⟩ digraph that the modern name "double U" derives."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/W

It also ties in with guilt and blame
the word is JUDGES

Judges? Interesting. Judges could lay guilt on people. It ties in with blame, as you say. So with the result of your research the solution would be:

"The Judges are the men that will not be Blamed for nothing".

So now we must interpret the results:

Why would Jack the Ripper blame some men who were judges?

Why would he at the same time write that the judges are the men that will not take the blame?

Who are the first and the second group of judges?

1. The judges are the men that will be blamed
2. The judges are the men that will not take the blame

This is actually a bit confusing right now. I´ll have to think about this.

Regards, Pierre

[David Orsam]

Judges could lay guilt on people.

I don't think so Pierre. In a criminal trial in England, it was (and remains) the role of the jury to "lay guilt on people". The judge, who was supposed to be strictly neutral during such a trial, was responsible for instructing the jury on matters of law, summing up on the facts and sentencing the accused if the jury produced a guilty verdict. So if you are impressed by the notion of "laying guilt", then "juries" would be a more suitable word here.

[Pierre]

I don't think so Pierre. In a criminal trial in England, it was (and remains) the role of the jury to "lay guilt on people". The judge, who was supposed to be strictly neutral during such a trial, was responsible for instructing the jury on matters of law, summing up on the facts and sentencing the accused if the jury produced a guilty verdict. So if you are impressed by the notion of "laying guilt", then "juries" would be a more suitable word here.

Hi David,

Do you know about cases without a jury?

Regards, Pierre

[David Orsam]

Hi David,

Do you know about cases without a jury?

I am aware of such things Pierre. But not in England in 1888 tried by judges.

[Errata]

Isn't the stem actually "Jubel" (Jubela, Jubelo, Jubelum)? That's something that always irked me about the Stephen Knight theory - how come the ruffians became "Juwes" and not "Jubels"?

Stem? Of what language? It's not Hebrew, it's not Latin, it's not Greek. It is no language these names should rightfully appear in. Might be Polish, theoretically could be Arabic but most likely isn't. I mean, if we are going to break this down in some linguistically appropriate way, we need to know what language it comes from. Hebrew stems are different than Latin ones, etc. Octopus vs. octopi vs. octopodes vs octopuses. Why is it waitress instead of waitrix?

Except of course these names were made up sometime in the 16th century, probably in French or English. So I guess you can conjugate them however you please. I would not be surprised if someone just decided that the plural was Juwes. Someone decided that young platypuses were rightfully called puggles. There's no rationale for that decision. It just is.

[Pierre]

I am aware of such things Pierre. But not in England in 1888 tried by judges.

But if you look for it you will find it.

Regards, Pierre

[David Orsam]

But if you look for it you will find it.

I don't think so Pierre otherwise you would have told me about it.

[Pierre]

I don't think so Pierre otherwise you would have told me about it.

David, just because you don´t know about a certain thing does not mean it did not exist. It did.

But since you always seem so sure and try to convince everyone that your knowledge is the right one, you will have to find it yourself.

Regards, Pierre

[David Orsam]

David, just because you don´t know about a certain thing does not mean it did not exist. It did.

But since you always seem so sure and try to convince everyone with your knowledge, you will have to find it yourself.

Nice try at bluffing Pierre but I can tell you that there were no trials without juries in England at the time which involved judges.

Either you can contradict me with some examples or it's game over for you.

[Pierre]

Nice try at bluffing Pierre but I can tell you that there were no trials without juries in England at the time which involved judges.

Either you can contradict me with some examples or it's game over for you.

OK, David. Believe what you want to believe. You always do.

And I would appreciate if you stopped using words like "bluffing" and "game" in a serious discussion.

Regards, Pierre