The word JUWES

[Sam Flynn]

Sticky fingers from blood might have challenged the writing skills of the author.

Writing on a vertical surface, especially with grooves/bumps between bricks, is enough to throw an inexperienced writer's chalk off course, whether their fingers are bloody or not.

[DJA]

Douwe Juwes de Dowe is the name of a Dutch painter. Barthold Van Douma was one of his subjects.

So that's why the paintings are dated before 1663.

Thanks.

The Douma family had well known associations with Jews.

Never read that bit down the bottom of the page

[Rosemary]

And there's the bit

I've almost no doubt that it was meant to read 'Jewes' but because of the poor legibility from comes with writing in chalk on a small brick jamb, the author didn't finish his 'e' properly and it was mistaken for a 'u'.

Sticky fingers from blood might have challenged the writing skills of the author. Or is that just me because I'm left-handed & we tend to smear when writing on painted bricks walls with chalk & sticky fingers.

[Purkis]

The Douma family were linked to Jews.
Juwes is not part of their name.

From Hell,From Hull......reckon Mike Covell has that one covered.

Douwe Juwes de Dowe is the name of a Dutch painter. Barthold Van Douma was one of his subjects.

[DJA]

So it is a name, as Mister Whitechapel recently suggested, rather than a reference to Jews? Interesting.
I don't think my movie-making skills (or lack thereof) would be up to the job, but I wish you luck with your project. The title is obvious, though....."From Hull"

The Douma family were linked to Jews.
Juwes is not part of their name.

From Hell,From Hull......reckon Mike Covell has that one covered.

[SuspectZero]

The truth is no matter what various People say, unless you can provide some evidence which links the Apron with the writing, other than they are found at the same location, that being a Archway and staircase, and lets be honest there is a considerable debate as to the exact location of the Apron,there is nothing to link them.

I am inclined to stick to this viewpoint until or if someone can provide a genuine link.
Agreed there are some theories which supply a link, but of those we know of, none of them provide anything solid, mainly relying on interpreting the writing as containing hidden/coded messages.

regards

Steve

Even then, the theories try to link the word Juwes with the Masons of which there is no link. The only true Masonic connection with the 3 ruffians is the Masonic ritual that incorporates them. However, that is where it trails off, as there is no connection between that ritual and the word Juwes or any other variation of that spelling.

[Errata]

Certainly, which has resulted in a plethora of fringe theories that are best described as Much Ado About Nothing.

But isn't most of it as well? We seem to have an even more basic problem than not knowing who actually authored the note. We don't even know what the note is supposed to say. We don't know if it's a positive or a negative, we don't know what it refers to, we don't know if it's even a big deal or just a marginally big enough deal that some spare time and some chalk makes it seem worth a go. We know what it says, sort of, the double negative thing is tricky, but we don't have a single clue as to why anyone felt compelled to say it. It's not mean, it may only be threatening because we hear a threatening voice in our heads when we see the double negative and assume a low education level. It says nothing. It's a graffiti equivalent of "Nice weather, isn't it?"

I mean it's nothing. The message says nothing, does nothing, implies nothing clearly, communicates nothing, it's nothing. It's all much ado about nothing.

An interesting nothing, but still nothing.

[Elamarna]

sticking to viewpoint

The truth is no matter what various People say, unless you can provide some evidence which links the Apron with the writing, other than they are found at the same location, that being a Archway and staircase, and lets be honest there is a considerable debate as to the exact location of the Apron,there is nothing to link them.

I am inclined to stick to this viewpoint until or if someone can provide a genuine link.
Agreed there are some theories which supply a link, but of those we know of, none of them provide anything solid, mainly relying on interpreting the writing as containing hidden/coded messages.

regards

Steve

[Wickerman]

I mean, personally, I have no doubt that however it was spelled, it was supposed to be "Jews," but it may have been misspelled.

Certainly, which has resulted in a plethora of fringe theories that are best described as Much Ado About Nothing.

[SuspectZero]

Juwes or Jews, if the writing was from JTR, then I still believe it was in reference to the interruption in Berner street but had nothing to do with Masons.

[RivkahChaya]

Letter from Chief Rabbi Hermann Adler to Sir Charles Warren—

"I do not know of any dialect or language in which 'Jews' is spelled 'Juewes'"

Source—Chaim Bermant, Point of Arrival / A Study of London's East End, London: Eyre Methuen, 1975, pp. 111-121.

Regards,

Simon

He should come over here and watch some pray TV. Some of those Christian preachers (the same ones who say "Ju-eeee-zus") pronounce "Jews," "Ju-yoo-es," or slight variations thereof.

Americans know what I'm talking about. These are the guys who, a few years ago, were whining about the "Whu-arr on Carissamus," because some retail sales people were saying "Happy Holidays" instead of "Merry Christmas."

Anyway, wasn't the GSG written on brick? not a smooth writing surface. The letters might break up, and it might be hard to tell whether something was a "u" or an "e." I mean, most of the other words, they'd infer from knowing how to read, but when they came to a key word where they weren't sure what it was (or were, but didn't want to be), not being sure what a single letter was suddenly became an issue.

I mean, personally, I have no doubt that however it was spelled, it was supposed to be "Jews," but it may have been misspelled.

For that matter, other words may have been misspelled and no one noticed. This is a known phenomenon. A word has to be very badly mangled, or easily mistaken for something that also makes sense in context before a misspelling trips you up. It's why proofreading is so difficult.

[Harry D]

I've almost no doubt that it was meant to read 'Jewes' but because of the poor legibility from comes with writing in chalk on a small brick jamb, the author didn't finish his 'e' properly and it was mistaken for a 'u'.

[David Orsam]

Six variations.

Go figure.

As I mentioned earlier in this thread, the surname of what I believe to be "Jewes" has been wrongly transcribed on Ancestry as "Juwes".

Go figure!

And had the list of names in the rate book not been in alphabetical order I would personally have concluded it says "Jeeves". There is a line through the name in the rate book (although it is still legible) but neither myself or the Ancestry transcriber was looking at it on a wall in the middle of the night.

[Joshua Rogan]

So it is a name, as Mister Whitechapel recently suggested, rather than a reference to Jews? Interesting.
I don't think my movie-making skills (or lack thereof) would be up to the job, but I wish you luck with your project. The title is obvious, though....."From Hull"

[DJA]

Hi DJA,
Do you have a source for that?
I've tried several online translators that do Frisian, but not got that result. Probably not the most definitive sources, but none of the spelling variations seems to be recognised in Frisian, whereas the English spelling "Jews" converts to "Joaden"

Also, if it is indeed a Frisian word, what do you make of it's relevance?

http://www.christies.com/lotfinder/LotDetailsPrintable.aspx?intObjectID=5188595

Jack the Ripper came from Hull.

There is still a ferry service.

Jack's father and uncle were Master Mariners
Links them to Mitre Square.

Currently in negotiations with a writer and possibly a publishing house.

Wanna make a movie