The Diary — Old Hoax or New or Not a Hoax at All?​

[Lombro2]

It amazes me why Peter Kurten would have to disguise his normal hand. What would make it distinguishable from every day German script from the time?

[rjpalmer]

The letter in question.

[Iconoclast]

In this instance, Mr. Wood was claiming that Maybrick wrote the letter dated October 8, 1888 and sent from Galashiels, Scotland, or more specifically, Innerleithen.

"John O.

I finally got the reply from Shirley confirming what was written in her book. In light of what she says perhaps you would like to comment on the probability of Bill being wrong? Anyway here it is:

"Hello Peter...its so good to know it is all still going on.....yes Keith
Skinner has confirmed too that when he showed Bill Waddell the Galashiels
letter alongside the authenticated writing of Maybrick Bill said "one and
the same" and he is not a man easily impressed."

--

The letter, if I recall, mentions visiting tweed factories, hence the attempt to link it to Mudbrick.

If it was Innerleithen (bloody miles away from Galashiels), why is it referred to as the Galashiels letter?

Ike

Goodness me, I note from my copy of Letters from Hell, that on October 8, 1888, Jack managed to post letters from London NW, Bethnal Green, Innerleithen (written in Galayshiels, sic), Lille, Birmingham, London EC, Dublin, and finally Whitechapel.

He certainly got around did Ol’ Jack!

[rjpalmer]

The letter, if I recall, mentions visiting tweed factories, hence the attempt to link it to Mudbrick.

Of course, tweed is generally made out of wool, so why Messrs. Wood & Feldman were attempting to associate a cotton merchant with these factories is something of a mystery.

[rjpalmer]

In this instance, Mr. Wood was claiming that Maybrick wrote the letter dated October 8, 1888 and sent from Galashiels, Scotland, or more specifically, Innerleithen.

"John O.

I finally got the reply from Shirley confirming what was written in her book. In light of what she says perhaps you would like to comment on the probability of Bill being wrong? Anyway here it is:

"Hello Peter...its so good to know it is all still going on.....yes Keith
Skinner has confirmed too that when he showed Bill Waddell the Galashiels
letter alongside the authenticated writing of Maybrick Bill said "one and
the same" and he is not a man easily impressed."

--

The letter, if I recall, mentions visiting tweed factories, hence the attempt to link it to Mudbrick.

[Iconoclast]

Tim
Strim
Rim
Trim
Skim
Muslim
Hymn

Maybrick really didn't apply much thought to this, did he?

[Iconoclast]

By the way, there is a rather strange book where the two authors argue that 'Walter' was Jack the Ripper.

I wonder if it would be easier if we all agreed that EVERYONE aged 20-60 in 1888 was Jack the Ripper. It might be more interesting (and easier) to discount candidates than add them.

Would you be able to help out a newbie, RJ, by clarifying which Ripper letter Peter Wood was referring to when he said it matched James Maybrick's handwriting, please? I'm assuming it was the September 17 'Dear Boss' letter, but worth asking nevertheless ...

Ta.

Ike

[Herlock Sholmes]

No; we can safely leave that to Russell Edwards, fortunately.

I once asked the Diary's supporters why we can't find any genuine Victorian (or even Edwardian) slang in the diary but received no response. The Victorians loved their slang, as did the writer of the 'Dear Boss' letter, and 'Sir Jim' plays word games yet the only slang expressions we find in the text were still in circulation when the diary emerged in 1992, and at least two of them--one off instance and bumbling buffoon--cannot be found in print until around World War II.

Personally, I think this stinks to high heaven. I would expect to find genuine Victorian slang in a sixty plus page personal diary, specially from someone who allegedly liked word games and is hanging out in East London....and yet there is none.

With that in mind, there's an utterly absurd passage in the diary where Maybrick dubs himself "Sir Jim" and states that he did the murders "all for a whim." He then throws a hissy fit, writing:

"I cannot think of another word to accompany Jim. I like my words to rhyme, dammit."

Melvin thought this was absurd and rightfully so, because any genuine Victorian male--and particularly one who was a known frequenter of brothels who allegedly sexually mutated women and on one occasion mused about shoving a cane up a woman's passage---would know the obvious rhyme: quim.

He's literally congratulating himself for murders where the victims' private parts were grotesquely mutilated.

The word is now more or less antiquated and has fallen out of use, but it was vulgar slang for a woman's genitals well-known to the Victorians and Edwardians.

One can see how widely used it was by looking into the pages of what was the most famous of all Victorian pornographic works, My Secret Life by "Walter, "published in 1888. Walter uses the word dozens of times. Even more frequently than he used the 'c word.'

Melvin's comment was this:

"As for the Diarist having problems finding a rhyme for Jim, this is crass. No authentic ripper-up of women would coyly shy away from using the familiar Victorian slang term : QUIM."

I think Melvin has a point. The passage shows the writer's ignorance of a well-known Victorian slang word--something that doesn't ring true unless the work was written in the late 20th Century.

Maybrick would have known the word. Mike and Anne Barrett, not so much.

If one is easily offended, don't read on, but for the sake of completeness here are some examples of its use in 'My Secret Life' (1888).




I could go on, but I'll leave it at that.

By the way, there is a rather strange book where the two authors argue that 'Walter' was Jack the Ripper.

Good points Roger, although our ‘wordsmith’ must have been having a ‘off’ day as also missed:

Him
Limb
Dim
Swim
Slim
Prim
Vim
Grim
Brim

And as it’s been suggested that the description “Jewish looking” was a reasonable one for Maybrick, perhaps I should add…

Kibbutzim

[rjpalmer]

It doesn't involve semen analysis, does it?

No; we can safely leave that to Russell Edwards, fortunately.

I once asked the Diary's supporters why we can't find any genuine Victorian (or even Edwardian) slang in the diary but received no response. The Victorians loved their slang, as did the writer of the 'Dear Boss' letter, and 'Sir Jim' plays word games yet the only slang expressions we find in the text were still in circulation when the diary emerged in 1992, and at least two of them--one off instance and bumbling buffoon--cannot be found in print until around World War II.

Personally, I think this stinks to high heaven. I would expect to find genuine Victorian slang in a sixty plus page personal diary, specially from someone who allegedly liked word games and is hanging out in East London....and yet there is none.

With that in mind, there's an utterly absurd passage in the diary where Maybrick dubs himself "Sir Jim" and states that he did the murders "all for a whim." He then throws a hissy fit, writing:

"I cannot think of another word to accompany Jim. I like my words to rhyme, dammit."

Melvin thought this was absurd and rightfully so, because any genuine Victorian male--and particularly one who was a known frequenter of brothels who allegedly sexually mutated women and on one occasion mused about shoving a cane up a woman's passage---would know the obvious rhyme: quim.

He's literally congratulating himself for murders where the victims' private parts were grotesquely mutilated.

The word is now more or less antiquated and has fallen out of use, but it was vulgar slang for a woman's genitals well-known to the Victorians and Edwardians.

One can see how widely used it was by looking into the pages of what was the most famous of all Victorian pornographic works, My Secret Life by "Walter, "published in 1888. Walter uses the word dozens of times. Even more frequently than he used the 'c word.'

Melvin's comment was this:

"As for the Diarist having problems finding a rhyme for Jim, this is crass. No authentic ripper-up of women would coyly shy away from using the familiar Victorian slang term : QUIM."

I think Melvin has a point. The passage shows the writer's ignorance of a well-known Victorian slang word--something that doesn't ring true unless the work was written in the late 20th Century.

Maybrick would have known the word. Mike and Anne Barrett, not so much.

If one is easily offended, don't read on, but for the sake of completeness here are some examples of its use in 'My Secret Life' (1888).




I could go on, but I'll leave it at that.

By the way, there is a rather strange book where the two authors argue that 'Walter' was Jack the Ripper.

[rjpalmer]

Hello Ike,

Not to steal Lombro's thunder, but I sometimes forget that you're a "newbie" to the Diary debate. That Peter Kurten's wife claimed that she didn't recognize his handwriting in letters written at the time of his murders was an argument raised several times on these forums over twenty years ago by, among others, Peter Wood and Caroline Ann Brown (when she was, I believe, less emphatic about the handwriting being the ultimate coffin nail--but you'd have to ask her).

Wood got the idea from something Donald Rumbelow had said, but I also remember seeing examples of Kurten's multiple scripts alongside something written by Anna Koren. Too much water under the bridge, but I'm sure it is still out there somewhere. Maybe it was Lombro.




However, what you should bear in mind is that Kurten was writing anonymous letters to the police & press, so it is hardly surprising he would disguise his handwriting.

But what Mr. Wood and perhaps others were attempting to suggest is that Kurten's handwriting changed because he was in the throes of psychosis, etc.--an argument that struck me as misleading and overblown. I believe Kurten was deliberately trying to disguise his handwriting and his wife, of course, would have wished to distance herself from knowledge of his crimes.

RP

[Iconoclast]

I’m the guy who first put up examples of Peter Kurten’s multiple handwriting in 2002. It’s still in the archives.

That was a day’s trip to the city. You’d probably call they a Reference Library Miracle and a Hoax.

Have you still got them, Lombro? I could do with them for SocPill.

If so, you know how to email me!

Cheers,

Ike

PS If anyone has any ideas or material I could use for SocPill, please email me at historyvsmaybrick@gmail.com.

[C. F. Leon]

The late, great Melvin Harris came up with an excellent reason for concluding that the diary is neither Victorian nor Edwardian, but it's X-rated so I'll have to give it some thought before discussing it.

It doesn't involve semen analysis, does it?

[rjpalmer]

The late, great Melvin Harris came up with an excellent reason for concluding that the diary is neither Victorian nor Edwardian, but it's X-rated so I'll have to give it some thought before discussing it.

[Lombro2]

I’m the guy who first put up examples of Peter Kurten’s multiple handwriting in 2002. It’s still in the archives.

That was a day’s trip to the city. You’d probably call they a Reference Library Miracle and a Hoax.

[Herlock Sholmes]

You’ve had this explained to you so many times but it either doesn’t sink in or you deliberately ignore it. Apart from this you clearly have no judgment when it comes to assessing suspects if you can keep trying to brush aside the very clear pointers shouting at us and telling us that this is a fake. The fact that it’s not in his handwriting immediately zooms it up from 0-80 on the percentages - and from a man who makes absolutely no effort to hide his identity. That Barratt tried to but a Victorian diary is yelling to you from the top of his voice FAKE but you and The Club turn a deaf ear. That he imitates the unusual grammar of the list nudges us even further into fake territory. That this well-to-do guy for some reason can’t afford a notebook or a diary sets half a dozen alarms blazing. That he claims to be a man who a witness says that he looks absolutely nothing like is duh…kind of a clue don’t you think? Then as Roger also pointed out..he locates the breasts in the wrong place…he calls his wife’s godmother her aunt! He names a neighbour that no one has managed to find. He allegedly committed a murder that no one can find. Oh…and a guy admitted to forging it - not to mention the journey into Grimm’s Fairy Tales when it comes to explanations for the diary’s origins.

The thing is a modern forgery. 100%.