Did Mary Kellys body illustrate anatomical knowledge?

[Patrick Differ]

This is a nagging question I keep coming back to. It stems from the comments by Doctors at the scene and post mortem narratives. My take is that as Surgeons, likely Cambridge trained, they would have a unique undertanding of how the victims bodies were mutilated. They certainly had the technical knowledge of the day, also well illustrated in the post mortem terminology.

Was it possible that these Doctors were too technical when they thought having some anatomical knowledge may have been a requirement for this killer? Maybe, but again if there was an expert at the scene and at autopsy it would have been them. They appeared conflicted with regard to anatomical knowledge although the additional extraction of Uterus and Kidney, in my opinion, would have moved their needle towards knowledge. Or at least...awareness.

Was the killer a trained medical person is an obvious question. The technical post mortem narrative concerning the Eddowes kidney and the repeat nature of removing intestines and the uterus seem to point to the affirmative. The cuts were not considered sloppy by these surgeons. Did this contribute to their conflict? They seemed to agree that the knife was sharp, and as we have a serial killer, the knife was kept sharp.

I also kept coming back to the question of... Where did the knowledge come from and what was available at the time to obtain it? Medical training, other education, books, knowledge transfer in the case of a butcher.

These questions led me down a path to see what was in fact available in 1888 London. To my astonishment the pictorial representations of human anatomy were readily available. I say astonishment because these illustrations look eerily like the bodies of these victims.

Was Mary Kellys organ placement around her body an attempt by this killer to illustrate human anatomy from some pictorial knowledge he himself had? I honestly could think of no other reason why he would have posed the body and organs that way. It appears deliberate. He could have just thrown them in a pile!!

The abdominal mutilations seem like less of mutilation and more like deliberate extraction. The bodies of Nichols, Chapman and Eddowes were laid open exposing organs and not carved up in a frenzy.

Whoever this killer was the Doctors were conflicted on this issue and struggled less with how ( some exposure to human anatomy) then perhaps who. The How would appear to be from an educational perspective and not some random frenzy. That would be my guess. The illustrations of that day were not unlike they are today. I believe the bodies mimic to some degree, right down to mention of skin flaps, to available illustrations of the day.

This killer was an expert with a knife and had some knowledge or awareness of the information required to perform these kills. Mary Kellys body has some semblance of an Anatomical illustration with parts placed around the body.

Do the bodies and Doctors observations indicate anatomical knowledge? I think they do when you consider the observation in similarity to known human anatomical illustrations of the day and the organ placement around Mary Kelly.

[FrankO]

I also kept coming back to the question of... Where did the knowledge come from and what was available at the time to obtain it? Medical training, other education, books, knowledge transfer in the case of a butcher.

These questions led me down a path to see what was in fact available in 1888 London. To my astonishment the pictorial representations of human anatomy were readily available. I say astonishment because these illustrations look eerily like the bodies of these victims.

Hi Patrick,

Besides the things you mention, there were also the 'Anatomical Venuses' displayed at museums back in the LVP and they look eerily reminiscent of the Ripper's victims.

The best,
Frank

[c.d.]

How are we defining "anatomical skill?" How are we defining "surgical skill?" Both terms seem pretty nebulous and both terms can run the gamut.

c.d.

[Patrick Differ]

How are we defining "anatomical skill?" How are we defining "surgical skill?" Both terms seem pretty nebulous and both terms can run the gamut.

c.d.

Its a valid question. Surgical skill by 1888 was pretty well defined and you see that in the post mortem narratives. Textbook and hands on training if you will. It seems unlikely any successful surgeon would be this killer. A discredited surgeon or failed medical student with revenge as motive seems possible. Eventhough there was a high demand for cadavers , by 1888 that supply appeared fairly regulated.

Surgical and medical students would have aquired the anatomical skill. Students at some point would have been required to remove organs. By 1885 they also would have been required to have the pharmaceutical and chemistry backgrounds to become Doctors.

The flip side of the surgeon is where the question of Who - becomes less clear. It becomes less clear as the description used to describe the murder weapon by Doctors points away from the standard Medical bag tools. A pointed knife about 6 to 8 inches long with a 1 inch thickness at its base appears to be the measurement. These Doctors were familiar with knife wounds.

This does not mean someone from the medical community could not have obtained such a knife. But when it comes to skill the question would be why deviate to a knife you dont use or might not be familiar with. Why take the risk if you are about to commit murder?

Did the killer need medical skill or just an awareness he could have received from a book or possibly from knowledge transfer between animal to human. A butcher perhaps.

Butchers who were still buying on the hoof in 1888 would have had animal anatomy knowledge and some skill when it came to eviceration. By 1888 the pork butchers specifically were using as much of the animals as possible including intestines for sausage casing. But not all Butchers and Slaughterers were the same and only Kosher Butchers inspected organs as part of Kosher Laws.

Its not clear to me that gentile carcass butchers would need knowledge beyond the specific cuts. Unlike Kosher butchers who required training in Laws and organ inspection. They would have been required to have a different skill. Would that be at least similar to that of removing human organs?

The Kosher community of butchers would have the closest knowledge transfer skill to a Surgeon. They would be trained in animal anatomy and would have little transfer requirement to do it.

Was revenge and rejection of skill part of this killers motive?

[The Rookie Detective]

Hi Patrick,

Besides the things you mention, there were also the 'Anatomical Venuses' displayed at museums back in the LVP and they look eerily reminiscent of the Ripper's victims.

The best,
Frank

A very good point Frank

The anatomjcal venuses originated in Italy in the 1780's in Florence IIRC.

They were anatomically accurate and were displayed in public for all to bare witness to.

But throughout the 1800's, different versions of these lifelike wax bodies were created in various other countries including the UK, Germany, and the Netherlands.
And unlike the earlier Italian versions that were seen as beautiful and artistic, the later models were far more grotesque and macabre; often depicting a scene of violence.

I concur with your point that they look hauntingly similar to the Ripper victims.

With this in mind, one could argue that the Ripper saw himself as an artistic killer; displaying his work for all to see.

Coupled with the actual injuries that Kelly, Eddowes, Chapman and Nichols suffered, I find credence in the idea that the Ripper was a man who had seen these models and felt influenced and intrigued by them; to the point where he wanted to explore the female form for himself.

What's interesting is that there were wax models made in the UK, that were displayed to the public.

These models were also labelled as "slashed beauties"...

Imagine if you will a young boy observing some of these lifelike wax models, and it affecting his mind to a point whereby a switch was flicked and he suddenly found viewing the models as a sexually stimulating experience that then drove him to go on and slay several women.

The impact of seeing these wax models in a public display, may indeed have had a profound effect on the man who would go on to kill...and experience the twisted thrill of cutting women up for himself.

Lots to ponder.

[Sam Flynn]

It wasn't surgery that Kelly'd body endured; it was crude excavation.