New Article on the Swanson Marginalia in Ripperologist 128

[Hunter]

I've always been of the opinion that the vast majority of Ripperology has been fluff with little real substance, and that few ever take the approach of the historian or apply the proper criteria in research, analysis and presentation. That is certainly not the case with this article. This is a textbook example of how it could and should be done... Excellent!

I hope that others who strive for honest credibility in this field take note from the lesson these gentlemen have exemplified. This is how a greater understanding of these events and the people involved is achieved.

[Monty]

I've always been of the opinion that the vast majority of Ripperology has been fluff with little real substance, and that few ever take the approach of the historian or apply the proper criteria in research, analysis and presentation. That is certainly not the case with this article. This is a textbook example of how it could and should be done... Excellent!

I hope that others who strive for honest credibility in this field take note from the lesson these gentlemen have exemplified. This is how a greater understanding of these events and the people involved is achieved.

This was worth repeating Cris.

Monty

[Monty]

Whilst the furore of the handwriting blew at it's strongest, the most obvious and shortest, quickest way to pour water over any possible suggestion of fakery was to produce more examples, both in Anderson's book, of the handwriting, and other examples, i.e. the address book for immediate comparison. It would have quashed any question stone dead. Why, pray, was this not done and ioffered for obvious immediate inspection? So many examples of the handwriting would have killed the notion stone dead. With that kind of certainty, an awful lot of rancour and ill feeling could have been avoided. I do not blame any individual for the lack of such materialistic presentation, but it seems obvious to me that it should have been done. Just my opinion.

Nor should you.

Blame the individual who made scurrilous remarks and those who were so quick to support them.

Monty

[AdamNeilWood]

Phil,

Many thanks for your considered response to the article and kind words.

In answer to your question as to why the 'new' handwriting samples weren't posted here when the finger pointing was at it's worse, they simply hadn't been discovered by Nevill Swanson at that time, only after I'd made my announcement that the article was going to published and work was well under way.

Also, the point of the article was to collate all the known information and evidence and to add to it with new research. If I'd have posted a photo of a page of the address book or a letter, or the News of the World memo, debate would have continued here and the evidence would have become fragmented .

Now, there's a 55-page article in which all the information you could want on the Swanson Marginalia is preserved in one place for posterity and easy access.

Finally, I'd like to think those who accused the Swanson family of fakery - to the extent of suggesting the News of the World didn't publish the story because the name Kosminski wasn't on the endpaper in 1981 but had mysteriously appeared by 1987 - will have the integrity to hold up their hands and apologise.

The Swanson family were incredibly open and helpful during our researches, at a time when accusations thrown their way could have resulted in them pulling down the shutters, and who would have blamed them.

Hunter, thank you!

Best wishes
Adam

[Chris]

If I'd have posted a photo of a page of the address book or a letter, or the News of the World memo, debate would have continued here and the evidence would have become fragmented .

Indeed. It's worth remembering that even after the correspondence with the News of the World in 1981 - referring to the annotations "naming" a suspect - was published here, doubts continued to be cast on the authenticity of the marginalia.

Given what has happened in the past, I think it was far better to produce a comprehensive survey of the evidence that would enable the question to be settled for once and for all. Adam and Keith have done that in a masterly fashion.

[Phil Carter]

Hello Adam,

Phil,

Many thanks for your considered response to the article and kind words.

You are most welcome and thank you for your kind description of my posting. . Again, well done to you both.

In answer to your question as to why the 'new' handwriting samples weren't posted here when the finger pointing was at it's worse, they simply hadn't been discovered by Nevill Swanson at that time, only after I'd made my announcement that the article was going to published and work was well under way.

Forgive me Adam, but I may be totally at sea here. I am of the impression that other handwriting examples of Swanson were known of, and seen by certain Ripperologists, in both other books and other examples in the same, main book, a long time ago. That is the impression I have been given earlier on this website. Without quoting directly, some examples of books with Swanson marginalia and annotatiions are already in private Ripperological hands are they not? My aplogies if this impression is incorrect.

Also, the point of the article was to collate all the known information and evidence and to add to it with new research. If I'd have posted a photo of a page of the address book or a letter, or the News of the World memo, debate would have continued here and the evidence would have become fragmented .

This I appreciate totally.

Now, there's a 55-page article in which all the information you could want on the Swanson Marginalia is preserved in one place for posterity and easy access.

Yes, and with the "fading" of the pencilled notes, it is most important too.

The Swanson family were incredibly open and helpful during our researches, at a time when accusations thrown their way could have resulted in them pulling down the shutters, and who would have blamed them.

Well, as much as I TOTALLY respect a private person's posessions, and the right to keep/show/hide away/ destroy etc whatever he or she wants, if one goes back through the physical history of where the book itself was at any one point, limiting access to the book by presenting it to a museum with extremely limited access, cutting out many interested parties, was in my opinion a wrong move. This has now been rectified and the current decision made by Mr. N. Swanson that the book would be in better hands of a historian/collector after this excellent presentation through Ripperologist rather than a museum is entirely logical and correct, imho.

Thank you for your considered and fair respeonse.

best wishes

Phil

[AdamNeilWood]

Forgive me Adam, but I may be totally at sea here. I am of the impression that other handwriting examples of Swanson were known of, and seen by certain Ripperologists, in both other books and other examples in the same, main book, a long time ago. That is the impression I have been given earlier on this website. Without quoting directly, some examples of books with Swanson marginalia and annotatiions are already in private Ripperological hands are they not? My aplogies if this impression is incorrect.

Well, as much as I TOTALLY respect a private person's posessions, and the right to keep/show/hide away/ destroy etc whatever he or she wants, if one goes back through the physical history of where the book itself was at any one point, limiting access to the book by presenting it to a museum with extremely limited access, cutting out many interested parties, was in my opinion a wrong move. This has now been rectified and the current decision made by Mr. N. Swanson that the book would be in better hands of a historian/collector after this excellent presentation through Ripperologist rather than a museum is entirely logical and correct, imho.

Hi Phil,

The handwriting samples which were already known were Swanson's annotations in other books in his library and his police notebooks. The new discoveries by Nevill were the address book and letters from DSS his grandson, including one in which he writes of his hand shaking 'paralytically'. Apologies for any confusion.

Regarding access to private materials, I wasn't referring so much to the the Marginalia itself but other family documents such as the address book, letters, Jim Swanson correspondence file etc. Without sight of these we wouldn't have been able to conduct a fraction of the research we did.

Best wishes
Adam

[Phil Carter]

Nor should you.

Blame the individual who made scurrilous remarks and those who were so quick to support them.

Monty

I will not cast blame upon anyone. You do it if you feel it necessesary.

Phil

[Monty]

I will not cast blame upon anyone. You do it if you feel it necessesary.

Phil

Heh, I bet you wont.

Tad too late to take that stance Phil.

Monty

[Phil Carter]

Hi Phil,

The handwriting samples which were already known were Swanson's annotations in other books in his library and his police notebooks. The new discoveries by Nevill were the address book and letters from DSS his grandson, including one in which he writes of his hand shaking 'paralytically'. Apologies for any confusion.

Regarding access to private materials, I wasn't referring so much to the the Marginalia itself but other family documents such as the address book, letters, Jim Swanson correspondence file etc. Without sight of these we wouldn't have been able to conduct a fraction of the research we did.

Best wishes
Adam

Hello Adam,

Thank you again for the kind and swift response.

No apology needed. My reference was indeed to the library kept books, amongst others. I would have thought that if there were a greater known examples of the man's handwriting that could have been presented long ago, then the furore may well have been avoided. As regards the examples already in Ripperolological posession, if my poor memory recalls correctly, these too could have added to and settled the problem, no?

The revealing of the shaking problem helps this an awful lot. May I ask a slightly cheeky question? As Mr N Swanson has only recently discovered the letters etc, are we now certain that the Swanson family has gone through all of the Donald Swanson material? Mr. N. Swanson's recent discovery indicates to me at least that his father my not have made such an exhaustive look through the family posessions as he himself has done. No suggestion of rudeness intended, but can we expect more finds?

The research and article was indeed heavily reliant on the material you quote.
So when asking my respectfully innocent but slightly cheeky question above, I have in mind any follow-up research and article you may present.

best wishes

Phil

[Phil Carter]

Heh, I bet you wont.

Tad too late to take that stance Phil.

Monty

Would you kindly expand and explain this comment, which I find personally suggestive and pointed. Kindly explain in full. Thank you.

Phil

[AdamNeilWood]

May I ask a slightly cheeky question? As Mr N Swanson has only recently discovered the letters etc, are we now certain that the Swanson family has gone through all of the Donald Swanson material? Mr. N. Swanson's recent discovery indicates to me at least that his father my not have made such an exhaustive look through the family posessions as he himself has done. No suggestion of rudeness intended, but can we expect more finds?

Hi Phil,

The reason these letters were only recently discovered by Nevill is that they were sent to DSS's grandson Donald Nevill, brother of Jim, and as such were in the possession of that side of the family.

They only arrived with Nevill when he recently began collating materials from all sides of the family to add to the Swanson Collection which will be offered for sale.

There is, therefore, a chance that further letters from DSS or materials belonging to him will be discovered by Nevill as he continues to build the Collection. But equally there might not be!

Best wishes
Adam

[Phil Carter]

Hi Phil,

The reason these letters were only recently discovered by Nevill is that they were sent to DSS's grandson Donald Nevill, brother of Jim, and as such were in the possession of that side of the family.

They only arrived with Nevill when he recently began collating materials from all sides of the family to add to the Swanson Collection which will be offered for sale.

There is, therefore, a chance that further letters from DSS or materials belonging to him will be discovered by Nevill as he continues to build the Collection. But equally there might not be!

Best wishes
Adam

Hello Adam,

Thank you once again for the swift and fine response.

In that case, may I ask you to pass on, and take the opportunity to wish Mr. Nevill Swanson well with what he manages to accrue, in the hope that perhaps, just perhaps, a tiny golden Ripperological nugget appears.

Many thanks

Phil

[Monty]

Would you kindly expand and explain this comment, which I find personally suggestive and pointed. Kindly explain in full. Thank you.

Phil

It really doesnt need expanding Phil.

You know what happened, you know you accusations and you know your part.

I shall expect an PM from Admin in due course.

Monty

[Tom_Wescott]

The past is the past, but I'll say again that from this point forward, all room for debate about the provenance and legitimacy of the marginalia has been removed, because of this article. Anyone suggesting from this point forward that Swanson did not write every word of it, assuming they have read this article, can only be seen as working from a personal agenda, but I would assume this won't be an issue again.

Of course, there's still plenty of room for debate as to whether Swanson personally suspected Kosminski. It seems to me he was more of a type b personality, falling in line with Anderson, who was unquestionably a type a personality.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott