Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

What do Maybrick believers believe about Jim as Jack?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Graham
    replied
    Somewhere in my several miles of bookshelves is an old (1930's or 1940's) compendium of British Poets volume which contains at least one of Crashaw's poems. So he was at least still in print as recently as that. Also, his works were I think first collected and published in full in about 1860 by a Mr Turnbull, so there is no reason to suppose he wasn't passing popular at that time. Could be that his poetry may have been taught in schools at the time, and that a middle-class youth like James Maybrick may well have picked some up during his school days. Crashaw's stuff is pretty obscure and metaphysical, not at all to today's tastes I should think, who who knows? Incidentally, his father was a red-hot bible-banging Puritan, which I should think our Richard might just possibly have railed against. There's quite a bit to be found about Crashaw on the internet, worth a quick scan if you're interested. I can't believe that Shelley had never heard of Crashaw.

    Another little bit of obscure info concerning Maybrick. I've just finished reading "If Walls Could Talk" by the lovely and hugely-entertaining Dr Lucy Worsley, and in it she makes passing mention of Charles Darwin being hooked on a "medicine" called Fowler's Solution to ease his dyspepsia. This stuff contained potassium arsenite amongst other horrors, and was sold as a cure-all, but particularly for use in digestive problems and, astonishingly, leukemia. Darwin described a feeling of nausea plus a tingling in his toes as, quote Lucy, "positive signs that the drug was working". She then adds that Darwin exhibited 21 of the 26 known symptoms of arsenic poisoning. I'd never heard of this jollop prior to reading Lucy's book, but I wonder if this is how our Jim got into arsenic big time. He complained of pain in his legs, so maybe the toe-tingling Darwin described was working its way upwards. Doesn't bear thinking about.

    Graham

    Leave a comment:


  • MayBea
    replied
    St. Mary Matfelon's is an Anglican church and St. Peter's in Liverpool, where James' father and grandfather were parish clerks is, of course, Anglican.

    Someone was familiar with Crashaw's poetry, but no more-so than James and his Anglican friends.

    Leave a comment:


  • MayBea
    replied
    I've never seen this story associated with Jack the Ripper before:
    * One of St Mary Matfelon’s origin stories places it in the hand of a French Murderer. In about 1428, a devout widow of Whitechapel was murdered by a man who was French or Briton born, after killing the woman in her bed he fled with jewels and “other stuff of hers. He was chased to the Church of St George in Southwark and challenged Privilege of Sanctuary. Unfortunately for him he was arrested and the next day taken back through Whitechapel where “the Wives cast upon him so much Filth and Ordure of the Street that ... they slew him out of Hand.”
    http://www.mjwayland.com/index.php/f...f-whitechapel/

    Leave a comment:


  • MayBea
    replied
    You mean the John Anderson story?

    It's pretty good.

    I didn't know Crashaw was the vicar of Whitechapel's namesake (Church of St. Mary's Matfelon). It can't be coincidental.

    Now who would know that? Maybe the son and grandson of a parish clerks.

    Leave a comment:


  • pinkmoon
    replied
    Originally posted by MayBea View Post
    I agree that Crashaw was a lost poet. An online source says not even Shelley knew of him. (Notes and Queries - Google Books)

    So I take it you believe the reference came from the Liverpool Crashaw compendium published in 1866 and not the Sphere volume of poetry, therefore written by a Victorian 'diarist' and not a modern one.


    There was one other 'blotchy faced' suspect named John Anderson, but he was pock-marked not really blotchy. If Cox could distinguish a carroty mustache, she could probably tell the difference between scars and blotchiness.
    http://www.casebook.org/ripper_media...jmorley/5.html
    Nice story .

    Leave a comment:


  • caz
    replied
    Originally posted by MayBea View Post
    I agree that Crashaw was a lost poet. An online source says not even Shelley knew of him. (Notes and Queries - Google Books)

    So I take it you believe the reference came from the Liverpool Crashaw compendium published in 1866 and not the Sphere volume of poetry, therefore written by a Victorian 'diarist' and not a modern one.
    Not sure how anyone could establish who Shelley didn't know about.

    But yes, I could more easily accept an older source than a modern one for Crashaw's cameo in the diary. That doesn't help me date the writing though.

    Love,

    Caz
    X

    Leave a comment:


  • MayBea
    replied
    I agree that Crashaw was a lost poet. An online source says not even Shelley knew of him. (Notes and Queries - Google Books)

    So I take it you believe the reference came from the Liverpool Crashaw compendium published in 1866 and not the Sphere volume of poetry, therefore written by a Victorian 'diarist' and not a modern one.

    Originally posted by pinkmoon View Post
    It's solved! again.
    There was one other 'blotchy faced' suspect named John Anderson, but he was pock-marked not really blotchy. If Cox could distinguish a carroty mustache, she could probably tell the difference between scars and blotchiness.
    http://www.casebook.org/ripper_media...jmorley/5.html

    Leave a comment:


  • caz
    replied
    Originally posted by MayBea View Post
    It's the perfect quote, Caz, in the context of a merchant/trader who's a killer suffering with the dark repercussions of his acts.
    It might have been the perfect quote, MayBea, had any evidence emerged that the real James Maybrick would have been familiar with Crashaw's poetry.

    Otherwise, it's a bit of a mystery why Crashaw - whose father had coincidentally been vicar of the original 'white chapel' - features at all. I would suggest that the diary's creator knew this titbit and included the quote quite deliberately for their "Whitechapel Liverpool/Whitechapel London" theme. Seems fitting somehow.

    Love,

    Caz
    X
    Last edited by caz; 01-07-2015, 09:25 AM.

    Leave a comment:


  • MayBea
    replied
    It's the perfect quote, Caz, in the context of a merchant/trader who's a killer suffering with the dark repercussions of his acts.

    Leave a comment:


  • caz
    replied
    Hi MayBea,

    This part of the diary concerns the murders, and the bad effect they are having on "Sir Jim", and has nothing to do with sexual intercourse. So quite apart from the million other reasons for rejecting Mike Barrett's forgery claims, I cannot accept that he found these words in a book at home, thought they sounded appropriate in the context of sex and death, and plonked them in the diary at this point. Whoever quoted those words put more thought into it than that, IMHO, and more understanding.

    Love,

    Caz
    X

    Leave a comment:


  • MayBea
    replied
    "Oh costly intercourse of death."

    Any thoughts on the Diarist's usage of this quote from poet Robert Crashaw, related to the 17th century definition of 'intercourse' as trade, commerce and communication.

    *http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/intercourse

    First recorded usage related to sex was in 1798*, a hundred years after Crashaw.

    But even in late 19th Century, one of our Fathers of Confederation (1867) was promoting 'free intercourse from sea to sea'.

    Leave a comment:


  • MayBea
    replied
    How ironic is it that Mrs. Maybrick wanted arsenic to eliminate her skin eruptions, and Mr. Maybrick, if it is true, had skin eruptions because of arsenic?!

    Leave a comment:


  • pinkmoon
    replied
    Originally posted by caz View Post
    Hi MayBea,

    Interestingly, one of the sources said by modern hoax theorists to be reflected in the diary text - Bernard Ryan's The Poisoned Life of Mrs Maybrick - mentions on page 29 that in November 1888 James was complaining to his new Liverpool doctor of 'ceaseless headaches over a period of three months, of a numbness of the left leg and hand after smoking heavily or taking too much wine, and of various skin eruptions...'

    One wonders why modern hoaxers failed to milk this heaven sent information for all it was worth, unless they knew nothing of Blotchy, or otherwise felt such symptoms might hinder rather than help their cause.

    Love,

    Caz
    X

    PS What's all this bollocks about the shawl?
    It's solved! again.

    Leave a comment:


  • caz
    replied
    Hi MayBea,

    Interestingly, one of the sources said by modern hoax theorists to be reflected in the diary text - Bernard Ryan's The Poisoned Life of Mrs Maybrick - mentions on page 29 that in November 1888 James was complaining to his new Liverpool doctor of 'ceaseless headaches over a period of three months, of a numbness of the left leg and hand after smoking heavily or taking too much wine, and of various skin eruptions...'

    One wonders why modern hoaxers failed to milk this heaven sent information for all it was worth, unless they knew nothing of Blotchy, or otherwise felt such symptoms might hinder rather than help their cause.

    Love,

    Caz
    X

    PS What's all this bollocks about the shawl?

    Leave a comment:


  • MayBea
    replied
    Members here are keen on Blotchy-Face Man. Is James Blotchy?

    James looks good for Blotchy. He's certainly the only suspect I know who has a condition with blotchiness as a side-effect.

    Arsenicosis is recognizable from skin color changes, blotches all over the face and body...

    http://www.who.int/features/archives/feature206/en/

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X