Prater's stairs

[David Orsam]

Pierre,
Your descriptions and layout are at odds with Stephen's drawings which is causing me utter confusion!
Your doorway to Prater's Stairs is using the Goad's map opening which I thought we decided was actually annotation on the map to say there is an 'opening' on the 1st floor (a window).

Or am I wrong?

Hi Richard,

According to Wickerman, the "1st floor" on the Goad map is actually the ground floor (because 1 = ground, 2 = 1st floor, 3 = 2nd floor). So he thinks the Goad map is indeed showing some kind of ground floor opening. In fact, he has concluded that this is Prater's door but he also thinks that it is in the wrong place on the map. So that doesn't really help us too much.

Pierre appears to have "fiddled" about with the diagram in that he has highlighted in bold the number "1" as if it is an oblique stroke which represents a door opening into the passage. That, at least, is one thing we have established is not the case.

Personally, I am sceptical that the map is showing a door because other external doors do not seem to be included on the map. Further, if it was Prater's door, it means that she accessed her room by entering half way into the shed which stored costermonger's barrows, which seems rather inconvenient to say the least. For me, that supposed opening is the most confusing part of the map.

[David Orsam]

Oh and Stephen, North is the front of #26 right?

South I believe. Mary's room is to the north of Dorset Street.

[richardh]

Thanks David

South I believe. Mary's room is to the north of Dorset Street.

[David Orsam]

I just want to make the point to Richard and Stephen that there is a school of thought which has been expressed in this thread that Mary's room was significantly smaller than is currently shown in the model.

This theory assumes that, when Mary's room was created, the brick wall remained in place and a wooden partition was inserted to create a narrow passage from Prater's door to the stairway. In other words, exactly the same as in the current model but with Mary's room being about 3 or 4 feet smaller (and the shed, consequently, being about 3 or 4 feet larger.

This arrangement does have the advantage of being in line with the plan and thus in line with the best evidence we would appear to have about the arrangement of the building.

Obviously, if the Goad map is not to scale in respect of the inside of 26 Dorset Street and/or the supposed brick wall did not exist then this theory can be abandoned but otherwise it seems to me to have some merit, even if it results in a very small room for Mary Kelly.

The other disadvantage is that it does not explain the supposed "opening" shown in the Goad map leading into the passage.

Just to add one more thing that troubles me. Once Prater entered through "her" door to climb the stairs (and having shut "her" door) there would have been no light source. In other words, she would have been climbing the stairs in the dark. Was that a typical nineteenth century peril in these types of buildings; would she have needed to light a lamp when they entered or would there have been some other way she could have seen where she was going?

[Stephen Thomas]

South I believe. Mary's room is to the north of Dorset Street.

Hence if you walked up the main stairs in #26 you would be travelling north and when the stairway turned back on itself halfway up you would then be travelling south back towards Dorset Street.

[richardh]

I thought it was a given that #13 was around about 12 or 15ft x 10? Now you're saying it could be a small as 12 x 7 ?

This gets worse !

I don't think it's possible to create what I wanted to create given that there is absolutely nothing any of us agree on and the only bit that might be accurate is Mary's door and her two windows - the rest is purely guess work.

[Pierre]

David is lying about me.

Pierre,
Your descriptions and layout are at odds with Stephen's drawings which is causing me utter confusion!
Your doorway to Prater's Stairs is using the Goad's map opening which I thought we decided was actually annotation on the map to say there is an 'opening' on the 1st floor (a window).

Or am I wrong?

Well, I havenīt discussed any annotation. So no.

Reading this before logging in I happened to see that David still is writing lies about me. It is disgusting.

I DONīT FIDDLE WITH THINGS DAVID. YOU DO.

I publish things and then this David comes in writing lies about me.

I have put him on the ignore list but perhaps there is something else I should do about it.

Anyway I have said all I have to say in the matter of Praterīs stairs for now.

.

[Pierre]

I thought it was a given that #13 was around about 12 or 15ft x 10? Now you're saying it could be a small as 12 x 7 ?

This gets worse !

I don't think it's possible to create what I wanted to create given that there is absolutely nothing any of us agree on and the only bit that might be accurate is Mary's door and her two windows - the rest is purely guess work.

No. Follow my advice and you will be able to use the correct measures.

[David Orsam]

I thought it was a given that #13 was around about 12 or 15ft x 10? Now you're saying it could be a small as 12 x 7 ?

This gets worse !

I don't think it's possible to create what I wanted to create given that there is absolutely nothing any of us agree on and the only bit that might be accurate is Mary's door and her two windows - the rest is purely guess work.

It gets even worse because the school of thought I'm referring to is talking about a width of 6 feet! About the length of the bed!! If it makes it any better, the length is said to be 15 inches. So we are looking at 15 x 6. Maybe a bit bigger if we allow the scale of the Goad map not to be 100% accurate.

I agree with you entirely that it might not be possible to create something that is universally accepted but if we can create something based on the Goad map then we might get close. In fact, were it not for that blasted "opening" it would be possible to create a model that entirely reflects the Goad map (corroborated by sketches and newspaper accounts), thus making it reasonably "bullet proof".

In terms of Stephen's plan, I'm not entirely sure where the information on which it is based came from, whether it is based on an educated guess, newspaper reports or some other evidence.

[David Orsam]

No. Follow my advice and you will be able to use the correct measures.

The problem with Pierre's "advice" is (a) that it would mean that a brick wall was referred to in 1888 as "a wooden partition" - his argument that contemporary references to a wooden partition are, in fact, to a wooden door is unsustainable - and (b) it places Prater's door in an unnatural and unlikely position inside the shed with no separation or partitioning between the staircase and the shed.

[Robert St Devil]

David. I dont think that stairway can be running in a manner that would have cut that back room off. If mjk door had been installed later, only access to that room would be the windows.
That line isnt the indication of a brick wall. Its showing where tge roof changes from 2 to 3 floors.

[richardh]

Well, for what it's worth, here is what I've done today in relation to the staircase from the shed to the 1st floor landing (as per Stephen's drawing).

[David Orsam]

Well, I havenīt discussed any annotation. So no.

Reading this before logging in I happened to see that David still is writing lies about me. It is disgusting.

I DONīT FIDDLE WITH THINGS DAVID. YOU DO.

I publish things and then this David comes in writing lies about me.

I have put him on the ignore list but perhaps there is something else I should do about it.

Anyway I have said all I have to say in the matter of Praterīs stairs for now.

There are three amusing things about this post.

Firstly, an admission from Pierre that he does read my posts "before logging in".

Secondly, the thing he appears to be objecting to me accusing him of doing is something it is perfectly obvious he has done! The "oblique stroke" on his diagram on #253 has clearly been highlighted in bold or darkened in some way which makes it appear like it is a door when, in fact, it is the number "1" (and the letters "ST" have become invisible so that it is not possible to see that it actually says "1st"). In other words, he fiddled with the map.

Thirdly, his comment: "perhaps there is something else I should do about it." I wonder if this is something the 1888 Police Code would have defined as "a threatening message".

[richardh]

Does anyone have the link for the online Goad map for Miller's Court please?

[David Orsam]

David. I dont think that stairway can be running in a manner that would have cut that back room off. If mjk door had been installed later, only access to that room would be the windows.
That line isnt the indication of a brick wall. Its showing where tge roof changes from 2 to 3 floors.

I don't understand the first two sentences Robert, can you clarify.

As for the final two sentences, I'm aware that this has been suggested as a theory but what is the evidence for it? As far as I can see from the key plan, a line drawn in that manner represents a brick wall.

Also, if the line is only indicating where the roof changes from 2 to 3 floors then why is there a gap in that line?

You seem to be saying that there was originally one very large room with no partitioning so that when one entered the front of number 26 Dorset Street one could see through the windows into Miller's court. Is that right? I find that a bit unlikely but if you can demonstrate to me that there really was no brick wall there it would certainly help matters and I am prepared to be persuaded.