An experiment

[David Orsam]

No I am not suggesting no one alive. I am suggesting that the writer of the graffiti in all probabilities having regards to getting the rest of the spelling correct would have known how to spell jews as an ethnic group correctly if that is what he wanted to write.

Well, then, you are, in effect, admitting that it is possible that the author of the CSG could have written "Jews" as "Juwes".

You started off telling us all what we had all overlooked. Perhaps you overlooked that simple point?

[Trevor Marriott]

Well, then, you are, in effect, admitting that it is possible that the author of the CSG could have written "Jews" as "Juwes".

You started off telling us all what we had all overlooked. Perhaps you overlooked that simple point?

I wrote that the writer if knowing how to spell jews correctly, and the fcat that jews was a common known word at the time, and had wanted to do so, could have done so with no need to change the spelling. Which leads me to suggest that the words jews was not the intended word.

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[David Orsam]

Pierre's a good example if, as I suspect from his posts, his first language isn't English.

Yes, and one of the points I have made in this thread was that the author of the CSG could have been a foreigner.

But then I would ask you if it was likely that an English speaker who could spell the words "reputation" and "family" and "example" would be likely mis-spell the word "probably". But (and I don't want to embarrass anyone) spyglass - who I assume is a native English speaker - made that mistake in an otherwise perfectly spelt post in this forum a few months ago as below:

"This has proberbly been asked before, but here goes anyway.
Assuming the graffito was written by the killer or someone who knew something about the murders, It crossed my mind today that maybe the word Juwes could be a family name or a gang/family name, someone or someone's with a reputation in the area.
This also could be a spelling mistake of a name, for example the name Jewiss is quite well known in my locality ( not in a bad way I may add ) and yet it is quite a rare name over all."

Seriously Bridewell I could point out such posts all the time were it not for that fact that it would be tiresome and annoying. People make spelling mistakes for all kinds of reasons - and I have no doubt that spyglass can spell "probably" very well 99 times out of 100, just a lapse of concentration - it can happen to anyone at any time, especially in the middle of the night in a rushed situation.

[David Orsam]

I wrote that the writer if knowing how to spell jews correctly, and the fcat that jews was a common known word at the time, and had wanted to do so, could have done so with no need to change the spelling. Which leads me to suggest that the words jews was not the intended word.

But it's your own premise that leads you to that conclusion.

How do you know that the writer actually knew how to spell "Jews" correctly?

[Trevor Marriott]

But it's your own premise that leads you to that conclusion.

How do you know that the writer actually knew how to spell "Jews" correctly?

Because if he got the rest of the spelling correct we must assume that he was not illiterate and with jews being one of the most common known names in London at that time the chances are that someone who wasnt illiterate would know how to spell jews correctly

Someone illiterate might have written "the joos r the men that wil not b blamed for nuffing"

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[Simon Wood]

Hi All,

What interests me is why Warren, Arnold, Swanson and PC Long all waited five weeks—until 6th November—before writing their GSG reports, in which they all offered differing versions of the grammar and spelling.

Long was especially egregious. Having insisted at the inquest that the GSG read "The Jews are the men that will not be blamed for nothing," he wrote in his report that it read, "The Juews are the men that will not be blamed for nothing."

Superintendent Arnold also spelled it Juews and crossed out one extra 'not' in his version.

Swanson rendered it as "The Juwes are the men who will not be blamed for nothing."

And Warren capitalised certain other words, giving it as, "The Juwes are The men that Will not be Blamed for nothing.

It's small wonder we can't agree.

Regards,

Simon

[Trevor Marriott]

Hi All,

What interests me is why Warren, Arnold, Swanson and PC Long all waited five weeks—until 6th November—before writing their GSG reports, in which they all offered differing versions of the grammar and spelling.

Long was especially egregious. Having insisted at the inquest that the GSG read "The Jews are the men that will not be blamed for nothing," he wrote in his report that it read, "The Juews are the men that will not be blamed for nothing."

Superintendent Arnold also spelled it Juews and crossed out one extra 'not' in his version.

Swanson rendered it as "The Juwes are the men who will not be blamed for nothing."

And Warren capitalised certain other words, giving it as, "The Juwes are The men that Will not be Blamed for nothing.

It's small wonder we can't agree.

Regards,

Simon

Hi Simon
But the one thing we should all try to agree on is that it was not written by the killer, and it does not contain any reference to the killings

If this can be achieved then its another part of the old accepted theory that can be dispelled.

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[David Orsam]

and with jews being one of the most common known names in London

But there is a difference, isn't there, in a name being commonly known and it being commonly known in written form?

Jose Mourinho is perhaps the most famous football manager in this country but loads of football fans can't spell his surname properly. That's even with it being in all the newspapers all the time.

And no-one is saying the writer was illiterate, of course he wasn't, but if you don't know how to spell a word you just don't know. I've already hypothesized that the spelling might have derived from "Judas".

[Trevor Marriott]

But there is a difference, isn't there, in a name being commonly known and it being commonly known in written form?

Jose Mourinho is perhaps the most famous football manager in this country but loads of football fans can't spell his surname properly. That's even with it being in all the newspapers all the time.

And no-one is saying the writer was illiterate, of course he wasn't, but if you don't know how to spell a word you just don't know. I've already hypothesized that the spelling might have derived from "Judas".

Well that is what I have said, the writer wrote the word juwes because it was how he thought the word he wanted to write was written by how it was pronounced. If that be the case we have to analyse the text and try to work out what was the correct word.

eg saw sore
pore paw
seen scene

[Simon Wood]

Hi Trevor,

Of course it wasn't written by the killer. And nor did he drop the piece of apron.

Insisting he did is an exercise in futility.

Just between you and me, I don't believe anything was written on the dado/archway.

Regards,

Simon

[David Orsam]

Hi All,

What interests me is why Warren, Arnold, Swanson and PC Long all waited five weeks—until 6th November—before writing their GSG reports

It's really very simple Simon.

The Commissioner was instructed by the Permanent Under Secretary at the Home Office on 5 November 1888 to provide the Home Secretary urgently with a full report of all the circumstances surrounding the erasure of the writing on the wall in advance of parliament meeting on 6 November 1888.

[Simon Wood]

Hi David,

I can still read your posts if I'm not logged in, so I've taken you off 'ignore.'

Okay. Why did the Permanent Under Secretary at the Home Office wait five weeks—until the day before parliament reconvened—before "urgently" requesting a full report on the GSG?

Regards,

Simon

[David Orsam]

Well that is what I have said, the writer wrote the word juwes because it was how he thought the word he wanted to write was written by how it was pronounced.

But I'm not saying that. Take Jose Mourinho again. Everyone has seen his name written down but not everyone can spell it correctly from memory. It's quite possible that the writer had seen the word "Jews" written down but in his memory it appeared as "Juwes". Perhaps, in part, because he associated it with Judas. I'm sure the psychology of spelling mistakes is fascinating but far more complicated than we can deal with here.

[David Orsam]

Hi David,

I can still read your posts if I'm not logged in, so I've taken you off 'ignore.'

That is most decent of you Simon and I can't tell you how grateful I am.

[David Orsam]

Okay. Why did the Permanent Under Secretary at the Home Office wait five weeks—until the day before parliament reconvened—before "urgently" requesting a full report on the GSG?

The answer to that would be that he was only instructed to write the letter to the Commissioner by the Home Secretary on 5 November.

As to why the Home Secretary decided on the day before parliament reconvened that he wanted a full report about the circumstances of the erasure of the writing on the wall, I don't have a pathway into the mind of the deceased gentleman nor can I really be expected to do your thinking for you. But one possible and very simple explanation is that he might have been worried that he was going to be asked about the topic in the House the next day - which would have been the first chance MPs would have had to raise the topic since the allegations about the erasure had been raised in the press in October - and thus wanted to ensure he was fully briefed on the subject.