The Indents in the GSG

[Trapperologist]

Look at how the bricks were laid,8" plus 4" equals 12".

Try counting out the letters and spaces between them.

The middle line is 17 letters and 3 spaces which equals 20.
Multiply by 3/4".
15" will not fit.

I think you're definitely right about the width of the pillar being a brick and a half but this photo shows 3 different length of bricks probably for decorative purposes.

Do you think the biggest size could be 10 inches and so the width 14 inches?

[DJA]

I agree there was plenty of space on the entryway jamb, but I think Sam was suggesting (I might be wrong) that the police constable didn’t have enough space on the page.

Look at how the bricks were laid,8" plus 4" equals 12".

Try counting out the letters and spaces between them.

The middle line is 17 letters and 3 spaces which equals 20.
Multiply by 3/4".
15" will not fit.

Sam makes a good point about poetry as this is the manner in which it is written.

Guess who was known as a lover of poetry!

Once again, the author and the person Long saw in Hanbury Street are of very similar height. About 5'3".

[Trapperologist]

The capital letters were about 3/4 of an inch and the spacings were generous.
The door jamb was about 12 inches wide.
Reckon the indentations were Sutton's ..... oops,Jack's.
Incidentally,written by someone of the same height witnessed by Long speaking to Chapman.

I agree there was plenty of space on the entryway jamb, but I think Sam was suggesting (I might be wrong) that the police constable didn’t have enough space on the page.

[Al Bundy's Eyes]

We cant know the format Al, simple. We don't even know if Juews was Juewes/Juwes/Jews or even Juvies. Maybe the author got p***** off that some teenagers stole his horse for all we know.

Or "Judges"..
If the two "recordings" don't match, is there any point looking for meaning in the physical appearance of the writing?

[Michael W Richards]

But if the GSG was noted by two officers, differently, and the home office memo isn't an exact reproduction of the graffiti, how on earth can any speculation be made as to the nature of how and where the lines break?
We don't know how it appeared.

We cant know the format Al, simple. We don't even know if Juews was Juewes/Juwes/Jews or even Juvies. Maybe the author got p***** off that some teenagers stole his horse, for all we know.

[Al Bundy's Eyes]

But if the GSG was noted by two officers, differently, and the home office memo isn't an exact reproduction of the graffiti, how on earth can any speculation be made as to the nature of how and where the lines break?
We don't know how it appeared.

[Trapperologist]

Hi trapper

bear in mind that Halse states there were three lines of writing.
to my mind the indentations of the third and fifth line are not original.

I think Sam answered that one with his post on the writing conventions.

It explains why Halse would have said there were 3 lines, with lines 2 and “3” broken over 2.

So we’re back to the question of why they were broken when as DJA said there was plenty of space, and why they were indented.

[Sam Flynn]

lets remember that this very important evidence was removed hastily because it was determined as potentially inflammatory, getting down the specific way it appeared might have been secondary to its interpreted message.

Agreed, which is why I think that the way the GSG appears in the above memo isn't meant to represent what it looked like on the wall.

[Michael W Richards]

I'd be interested to know if that (cropped) image represents the part or the whole of the transcript. If we look at the entire page from the archive, the transcript appears in a very odd location on the page. Source, Wikipedia:



Surely it would have been more natural to place the block of text at lhe top of the page, or at least more centrally, which might suggest that this is a facsimile (lithograph or whatever) of the original. If so, perhaps the transcript was originally written on part of a page, e.g. a footnote or marginalia, and/or in a smallish pocket-book, which was likely given that Warren's copy was made on the spot before the GSG was erased.

In either case, the writer would have been constrained and perhaps ran out of space. In such instances, it was often the custom to break a line of text over two lines, with the overspill right-justified and/or indented from the left. I myself recall using that convention, and you still see it in books of poetry and printed editions of plays. For example:

Shall I compare thee to

A summer's day?

Thou art more lovely and

More temperate

Which given more space would originally have been written:

"Shall I compare thee to a summer's day?
Thou art more lovely and more temperate"

Rather than reproducing indents present in the original, might Warren only have had enough space to write "The men that w" until he got to the edge of his page? In which case he'd have had to put "will not" on another line, with Warren himself adding the indents purely by convention. Or, if the indents were present in the graffito, the author might have adopted the same solution when he ran out of space on the bricks. In other words, the indents might be little more than "word-wrap", allied to the practice of right-justifying/indenting any surplus text broken over two lines.

I believe that no indented version is ever described as an attempt to replicate exactly how the message was written or with what word each line began Sam. Their goal was to try and get one version of the actual wording instead of what is it, 4 or 5 versions, including how many lines, how words were spelled, what word began each line....lets remember that this very important evidence was removed hastily because it was determined as potentially inflammatory, getting down the specific way it appeared might have been secondary to its interpreted message.

[DJA]

The capital letters were about 3/4 of an inch and the spacings were generous.
The door jamb was about 12 inches wide.
Reckon the indentations were Sutton's ..... oops,Jack's.
Incidentally,written by someone of the same height witnessed by Long speaking to Chapman.

[Sam Flynn]

bear in mind that Halse states there were three lines of writing.
to my mind the indentations of the third and fifth line are not original.

As I initially suspected.

[Sam Flynn]

I'd be interested to know if that (cropped) image represents the part or the whole of the transcript. If we look at the entire page from the archive, the transcript appears in a very odd location on the page. Source, Wikipedia:



Surely it would have been more natural to place the block of text at lhe top of the page, or at least more centrally, which might suggest that this is a facsimile (lithograph or whatever) of the original. If so, perhaps the transcript was originally written on part of a page, e.g. a footnote or marginalia, and/or in a smallish pocket-book, which was likely given that Warren's copy was made on the spot before the GSG was erased.

In either case, the writer would have been constrained and perhaps ran out of space. In such instances, it was often the custom to break a line of text over two lines, with the overspill right-justified and/or indented from the left. I myself recall using that convention, and you still see it in books of poetry and printed editions of plays. For example:

Shall I compare thee to

A summer's day?

Thou art more lovely and

More temperate

Which given more space would originally have been written:

"Shall I compare thee to a summer's day?
Thou art more lovely and more temperate"

Rather than reproducing indents present in the original, might Warren only have had enough space to write "The men that w" until he got to the edge of his page? In which case he'd have had to put "will not" on another line, with Warren himself adding the indents purely by convention. Or, if the indents were present in the graffito, the author might have adopted the same solution when he ran out of space on the bricks. In other words, the indents might be little more than "word-wrap", allied to the practice of right-justifying/indenting any surplus text broken over two lines.

[Al Bundy's Eyes]

Would it not be impossible to make any assumptions on the physical appearance of the GSG, on account of the fact that we have this one second hand transcribing, which is disputed anyhow.
Maybe someone should have taken a photo...

[Kattrup]

Hi trapper

bear in mind that Halse states there were three lines of writing.
to my mind the indentations of the third and fifth line are not original.

[Trapperologist]

I’m interested in the indents in the Goulston Street Graffito from the rendering in the Home Office.

It would have been rendered from memory but I doubt the indents were invented and not evident.

They’re all the more relevant since it has become clear after years of misinformation that the words were written on the inside of the entryway jamb/post which would be, I’m guessing, about 14-16 inches wide.

https://wiki.casebook.org/images/gsg_homeoffice.jpg