Kosminski and Victim DNA Match on Shawl

[Chris]

Folks are arguing whether the pattern is painted or printed? Wood-block printing on cloth goes back millenia.

Well, it does say in the book:
"The difference [in solubility] between the two [blue and brown] dyes also suggested that the shawl was not machine printed, but that the dye was hand-applied."

And later on an absorption test using a spectrophotometer shows that there is only one pigment in the blue areas, from which they conclude that it was "definitely not screen printed".

But looking at the pattern, it was surely machine printed in some way.

[Jeff Leahy]

Well, it does say in the book:
"The difference [in solubility] between the two [blue and brown] dyes also suggested that the shawl was not machine printed, but that the dye was hand-applied."

And later on an absorption test using a spectrophotometer shows that there is only one pigment in the blue areas, from which they conclude that it was "definitely not screen printed".

But looking at the pattern, it was surely machine printed in some way.

Hi Chris

Sorry to ask questions. But it does seem relevant if some sort of mechanical operation was undertaken who or what the material might be. Do you or anyone else know the potential variety of techniques that might have created the material?

I'd also be most interested if the authors of the A to Z might be able to confirm the source of their claim that the shawl had been previously dated by experts?

Yours Jeff

[Theagenes]

Theagenes/Mick,

I'm thick skinned, no harm done.

Amanda

And I'd love to hear your thoughts on what the shawl might be.

[lynn cates]

Cadosch

Hello MrB.

"So to add to his encyclopaedic knowledge of police beats and work routes we must add the bladder and bowel movements of 29 Hanbury Street?"

Whilst next door, Albert nearly tripped him up.

Cheers.
LC

[lynn cates]

good

Hello Mick.

"He's not a good writer."

Or researcher? Or criminologist?

Cheers.
LC

[MrBarnett]

Hello MrB.

"So to add to his encyclopaedic knowledge of police beats and work routes we must add the bladder and bowel movements of 29 Hanbury Street?"

Whilst next door, Albert nearly tripped him up.

Cheers.
LC

Hi Lynn,

It would appear poor old Albert had prostrate problems. I can just about accept that Jack had his finger on the pulse or in every local pie, but for him to be able to anticipate Albert's nocturnal wandering would be taking things to the extreme.

MrB

[Jeff Leahy]

Hello Mick.

"He's not a good writer."

Or researcher? Or criminologist?

Cheers.
LC

Hi Lynn

If your referring to Russell Edwards then these charges could be levelled at all of us. We are after all largely struggling ripperologists trying to understand lots of fields that seem relevant to one area or another we are examining..

Indeed it might be argued that becoming a ripperologist you condemn yourself to being the 'Jack' of all trades, if you'll excuse the pun.

My conversation with Russell suggested a genuine chap with an interest in the case trying to follow a lead he believes in. And that accusation might be laid at many 'Suspect' ripperologist on these boards.

And in my opinion it is often suspect ripperologist who drive the case forward so please cut the man some slac. I don't believe we are looking at any 'untoward' if some understandable over enthusiasm.

Yours Jeff

[Caligo Umbrator]

Well, it does say in the book:
"The difference [in solubility] between the two [blue and brown] dyes also suggested that the shawl was not machine printed, but that the dye was hand-applied."

And later on an absorption test using a spectrophotometer shows that there is only one pigment in the blue areas, from which they conclude that it was "definitely not screen printed".

But looking at the pattern, it was surely machine printed in some way.

Hi, Chris
Before I moved to America I was an antique dealer.
I owned and sold many Georgian, Victorian and Edwardian artifacts. As I've stated elsewhere on this forum I'd date the shawl to around the early 1820's-1840's and, as I've not handled it or seen it with my own eyes, give a margin of around 5 years either side.
The way that designs were applied to textiles varied considerably in the 19th C. From the images I've seen I'd agree that the design is unlikely to be woven in to the fabric. Machine printing is not the only method of determining a uniform pattern. I owned and sold many hard wood block print patterns that where designed to be overlaid upon material in repetitive ways.
So to fulfill a pattern there could be one block for every colour. One for green leaves, one for red petals, etc. All carved to match up to a full design and all laid upon the material separately in succession, by the persons producing the item.

[Chris]

Machine printing is not the only method of determining a uniform pattern. I owned and sold many hard wood block print patterns that where designed to be overlaid upon material in repetitive ways.
So to fulfill a pattern there could be one block for every colour. One for green leaves, one for red petals, etc. All carved to match up to a full design and all laid upon the material separately in succession, by the persons producing the item.

Thanks for this explanation. So it could have been printed using blocks that were applied by hand rather than by machine? I suppose what I was really trying to say is that it couldn't have been just hand-painted - but that's not what the book says anyway.

What I still don't follow, though, is why the fact that the blue and brown dyes have different solubilities should indicate hand printing rather than machine printing.

[Theagenes]

Hi, Chris
Before I moved to America I was an antique dealer.
I owned and sold many Georgian, Victorian and Edwardian artifacts. As I've stated elsewhere on this forum I'd date the shawl to around the early 1820's-1840's and, as I've not handled it or seen it with my own eyes, give a margin of around 5 years either side.
The way that designs were applied to textiles varied considerably in the 19th C. From the images I've seen I'd agree that the design is unlikely to be woven in to the fabric. Machine printing is not the only method of determining a uniform pattern. I owned and sold many hard wood block print patterns that where designed to be overlaid upon material in repetitive ways.
So to fulfill a pattern there could be one block for every colour. One for green leaves, one for red petals, etc. All carved to match up to a full design and all laid upon the material separately in succession, by the persons producing the item.

Thanks for this. It's refreshing to get a take on this object from someone who has some knowledge in the area. Do you have any thoughts on where it might have been produced? According to Edwards the experts he spoke to didn't seem to think it was English but possibly Continental, but in looking online I've seen some Spit aliens shawls from that period that are very similar to this one in design.

Edit: "Spit aliens" = "Spitalfields" -- best auto correct laugh I've had in a while.

[Caligo Umbrator]

Thanks for this explanation. So it could have been printed using blocks that were applied by hand rather than by machine? I suppose what I was really trying to say is that it couldn't have been just hand-painted - but that's not what the book says anyway.

What I still don't follow, though, is why the fact that the blue and brown dyes have different solubilities should indicate hand printing rather than machine printing.

Hi, Chris.
I should state, just to be clear and before anyone gets carried away, I'm not stating that it was produced using wooden block for the printing - just that such a production was in use at the time that I believe the item was manufactured. It could conceivably have been produced using roller printing but generally, for this type of item, that wasn't something in major commercial use until nearly 1850 or so due to the restriction in colour palates that the technical aspect of the process required. If roller print was used on the shawl then that would tend to date the item sometime past 1860, by which time the technique had become more advanced and could offer more colours in production.

[mickreed]

And in my opinion it is often suspect ripperologist who drive the case forward so please cut the man some slac. I don't believe we are looking at any 'untoward' if some understandable over enthusiasm.

Yours Jeff

Hey Jeff

Normally, your plea to 'cut the man some slack' would fall on fertile ground with me. After all, it's only by following up idea and formulating theories that progress is made in any field of research.

But... RE has gone out on such a limb of utter certainty, saying in effect, 'this cannot be gainsaid; there is nothing further to add to what I/we have discovered; the case is solved, no ifs, no buts'.

Given such outrageous arrogance, then slack should not be offered.

Either he really believes his own publicity, in which case, an 'I believe this to be true' might - just - earn a bit of slack; or he doesn't believe it in which case he's a money-grubbing charlatan and deserves all he gets.

Now, I believe he's probably the former and actually believes this stuff, but he still needs to tone it down a bit.

He's not the first to make claims of this kind, Cornwell, and quite a few more. I didn't notice them getting a lot of slack cut.

[Chris]

I should state, just to be clear and before anyone gets carried away, I'm not stating that it was produced using wooden block for the printing - just that such a production was in use at the time that I believe the item was manufactured.

Yes, I can see you're not saying that.

But in the book, the argument seems to be that because the two dyes had different solubilities, that suggested the dye had been applied by hand, not by machine. That's the argument I still don't follow.

[Jeff Leahy]

He's not the first to make claims of this kind, Cornwell, and quite a few more. I didn't notice them getting a lot of slack cut.

Actually I got in quite a lot of stick on these boards for suggesting exactly that and understand Patricia has another book due for release next year.

If your saying 'Caseclosed' based on what we currently seem to know is 'a little premature'. I'm vary much in agreement with you.

Re: Caligo. Many thanks for the information you are supplying which answers many of my questions. Before screen printing we have Roller printing (Not that I understand this process even though I did a A level in Printing many years ago….and my family were fleet street printers.

And we have woodblock printing. Presumably this would be a similar to a process I did at A level called 'Lyno' printing but in wood?

Many thanks

Jeff

[Caligo Umbrator]

Thanks for this. It's refreshing to get a take on this object from someone who has some knowledge in the area. Do you have any thoughts on where it might have been produced? According to Edwards the experts he spoke to didn't seem to think it was English but possibly Continental, but in looking online I've seen some Spit aliens shawls from that period that are very similar to this one in design.

Edit: "Spit aliens" = "Spitalfields" -- best auto correct laugh I've had in a while.

Hi, Theagenes.
I can only say that when i and other dealers used the term 'Spitafields' when referring to material, we were meaning that it was woven design, rather than printed and that it is a higher quality of item. At least that's what we meant 15 years ago. I haven't been involved much in the trade since then.
Sometime in the late 1820's, in England, the law was changed to allow for French imports of material and clothing. In reply to that change and so as to remain viable in competition to such imports, the methods of manufacture previously adhered to by major cotten and silk centers in England changed and allowed this for a significant decrease in the overall quality of middle class clothing goods.
So sometimes when a dealer states that a shawl is a 'Spitafields shawl' he or she is referring to the quality and date of manufacture as well as the process. It is not necessarily that the item in question can provably be placed in that particular location for manufacture, just that it conforms to the criteria in terms of quality, date and country of manufacture.