The Goulston Street Apron

[caz]

...or indeed a mountain of graffiti when there is no evidence that the entrances to the recently built Model Dwellings were frequently daubed with it.

I'm just not sure why people argue for the writing to have been there for some time, when there is simply not a shred of evidence for it. Often it's the same people who demand evidence in every other situation.

Love,

Caz
X

[Wickerman]

Hi Jon,

Put it this way. If you came home or went out and there was some ridiculous schoolboy scribbling in chalk on the black bricks at the entrance to your home, would you:

a) not even see it there?
b) pay no attention?
c) make a mental note to remove it if your religion didn't allow you to do so immediately?

All I'm saying is that as nobody ever said afterwards that they had seen the writing there, before PC Long's first recorded sighting at 2.55am, I find it unlikely that it could have been there since before sundown on the Saturday. Possible, but unlikely. And of course there is no evidence that it was.

Love,

Caz
X

Hi Caz.
Its all a matter of context. If I lived at Harewood House I'd be damned if I'd tolerate graffiti on the walls, but if I lived on the Chatsworth Estate, I'd likely never even notice it.
I made the same point as you do above in my dissertation all those years ago, but I do recognise that this writing being so small may have gone unnoticed.
Much is made of this single example but how much more graffiti was on the walls, or in the neighborhood, we just cannot say. We may be making a mountain out of a mole hill.

.

[curious4]

Haha!

Does surprise me that the writer didn't have time to end his message with "haha" though!

C4

[Simon Wood]

Hi All,

Here's a transcript of an 11th October 1888 memo sent by Sir Charles Warren to Godfrey Lushington at the Home Office.



After suggesting the idiom might "be that of an Irishman speaking a foreign language", or that of "Spain or Italy", Warren states that "The spelling of 'Jews' or 'Jewes' is curious."

He then concludes by giving a rendition of the GSG as it appeared to him on the dado/archway/wherever, in which the operative word is spelt "Juwes."

Small wonder we're confused.

Regards,

Simon

[caz]

On the contrary, Jews have tolerated considerably worse treatment than some ridiculous schoolboy scribbling. Why would they even pay attention to it, they were likely above all that. Sticks and stones, etc...

Hi Jon,

Put it this way. If you came home or went out and there was some ridiculous schoolboy scribbling in chalk on the black bricks at the entrance to your home, would you:

a) not even see it there?
b) pay no attention?
c) make a mental note to remove it if your religion didn't allow you to do so immediately?

All I'm saying is that as nobody ever said afterwards that they had seen the writing there, before PC Long's first recorded sighting at 2.55am, I find it unlikely that it could have been there since before sundown on the Saturday. Possible, but unlikely. And of course there is no evidence that it was.

Love,

Caz
X

[caz]

Personally, I believe that the association with the apron was accidental, and I also believe that were the apron not left near the graffito, no one would have thought it was an accusation that had anything to do with the Ripper.

Ah but there's the rub, because we can't simply remove the apron piece like the police did, or pretend it was not left near the graffito, arguably close in time to when the latter was left.

Love,

Caz
X

[caz]

It was the middle of the night on Shabbes. No one would have been up and about in that building. Non-observant Jews who lived there would have accepted the fact that a certain amount of quiet on Shabbes went with living there, or, they would have gone somewhere else for the night. The graffito would have stayed there until sundown on Saturday if the police had not wiped it away. The residents were probably never even aware of it, though, as it was, going up late at night, and being wiped out shortly thereafter.

I agree with your final sentence, Rivkah.

The point is, all the arguments in the world for the writing being there earlier and simply not being noticed, or nobody being able or willing to remove it before the police did so, do not amount to evidence that it was there before the early hours of Sunday morning; only that it is possible in theory.

Love,

Caz
X

[Monty]

The writing can be seen as a defiant statement, so GM is quite correct.

Monty

[Errata]

On the contrary, Jews have tolerated considerably worse treatment than some ridiculous schoolboy scribbling. Why would they even pay attention to it, they were likely above all that. Sticks and stones, etc...

But people take pride in their home. I'm sure it would have been washed off as soon as someone was available to do so. But it's not like someone would have broken the sabbath or gotten off work early just to make it happen.

[Wickerman]

I dont think its unreasonable to think that older buildings would collect graffiti more than newer ones. Certainly not lame anyway. Though it is a minor point-The main point being that it was mainly inhabited by jews who would surely would have erased the possibly negative jewish graffiti the moment they saw it. more than likely the GSG was written that night and never saw the light of day.

On the contrary, Jews have tolerated considerably worse treatment than some ridiculous schoolboy scribbling. Why would they even pay attention to it, they were likely above all that. Sticks and stones, etc...

[RivkahChaya]

And there were a lot of atheist Jews in the area, but that and the idea that it may or may not have stayed on the wall for a time is relevant in what way? Serious question.

Mike

I dont think its unreasonable to think that older buildings would collect graffiti more than newer ones. Certainly not lame anyway. Though it is a minor point-The main point being that it was mainly inhabited by jews who would surely would have erased the possibly negative jewish graffiti the moment they saw it. more than likely the GSG was written that night and never saw the light of day.

Not on Shabbes. Anyone observant, who lived in the area, and anyone who lived in the area who was not trying to be provocative, would not erase it on Shabbes.

As far as why it's relevant, I'm not the one who brought it up.

Personally, I believe that the association with the apron was accidental, and I also believe that were the apron not left near the graffito, no one would have thought it was an accusation that had anything to do with the Ripper.

[Michael W Richards]

Anti-Jewish? Nah... Think "Pro-Jew" and "solidarity". Those are the reasons the police were afraid of it.

Mike

? You are talking about the same grafitto arent you Mike?

Regards

[Abby Normal]

I dont think its unreasonable to think that older buildings would collect graffiti more than newer ones. Certainly not lame anyway. Though it is a minor point-The main point being that it was mainly inhabited by jews who would surely would have erased the possibly negative jewish graffiti the moment they saw it. more than likely the GSG was written that night and never saw the light of day.

[The Good Michael]

It was the middle of the night on Shabbes. No one would have been up and about in that building. Non-observant Jews who lived there would have accepted the fact that a certain amount of quiet on Shabbes went with living there, or, they would have gone somewhere else for the night. The graffito would have stayed there until sundown on Saturday if the police had not wiped it away. The residents were probably never even aware of it, though, as it was, going up late at night, and being wiped out shortly thereafter.

And there were a lot of atheist Jews in the area, but that and the idea that it may or may not have stayed on the wall for a time is relevant in what way? Serious question.

Mike

[RivkahChaya]

It was the middle of the night on Shabbes. No one would have been up and about in that building. Non-observant Jews who lived there would have accepted the fact that a certain amount of quiet on Shabbes went with living there, or, they would have gone somewhere else for the night. The graffito would have stayed there until sundown on Saturday if the police had not wiped it away. The residents were probably never even aware of it, though, as it was, going up late at night, and being wiped out shortly thereafter.